Topic: independent media
Would this image of arguable child abuse be filtered by the proposed Australian internet filter? Presumably the intention would be not to. Or maybe it would? It was sent to us by an activist/artist woman in our networks.
Did you laugh? It's a pretty awful series of pics maybe by anti Christmas types. Or anti Coca Cola given Santa used to be in green. Or defiant DINKs? Or just people with a rich sense of humour? On one level the image is a very witty comment on a silly tradition in western society that is seen as harmless and innocent - the cute baby pic of child on Saint Nicholas's knee. Inevitably taken in shopping centres. All part of the Coca Cola consumerist indoctrination from the earliest age one presumes. What could be more western and mainstream than that?
The thought of net censorship crossed our mind given a controversial case of a guy in the news recently who uploaded a borderline bad taste video of roughhouse 'play' with a child. We really don't approve of that unless like they are world class acrobats or something. It's bound to end in kids getting hurt.
Which brings us to the big serious argument over the management of the web in a civilised society: Here's a good roundup by Glenn Milne of News Corp
Hi everyone,Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2008 8:36 PMSubject: The Internet Filter - A Bad Idea.
Normally we do not allow political topics here on the forums as people tend to take sides and it can end in arguments. However on this occasion I think we can *all* agree that the plan to filter the internet is a very bad idea.
If this filter is implemented, it may change the internet as we know it. It may change blogging as we know it. Asher Moses reported - Entire user-generated content sites, such as YouTube and Wikipedia, could be censored over a single suspect posting - this means sites like Blogger and Wordpress.com could also be censored.
There will be no way for people to opt out of the filter, it will slow down the internet significantly, and recently Senator Stephen Conroy has admitted in a blog post that the government intends to use the filter to filter peer to peer and bit torrent traffic as well.
We have a post on the forums with more information and things you can do to express your thoughts and feelings on this subject to politicians. We also suggest writing a blog post to inform your readers about the proposed plans.
As I say, normally we do not get political but this is a serious issue that may affect us all, and we feel it is important to inform our forum members of the latest developments, provide a thread where you can discuss it, and provide ways you can take action if you feel as strongly as we do on this topic. The thread can be found here -
The Aussie Bloggers Forum Team.
Postscript 29th Jan 2008
Up until now SAM hasn't got too exercised about the net filtering plan. We are equally concerned about child safety. And perhaps because there is a critical mass of concern being democratically expressed so we can coast on the issue.
SAM has a longer term concern. Two way cameras as a compulsory installation on home computers or networked through private homes. Just like Orwell's 1984. Interesting to note bus drivers in the last Sunday press reacting industrially to 'spy' cameras on them in their driver's seat as oppressive intrusions, that interferes in their concentration on the road. Mmm. A taste of civil liberties battle to come? Similarly Police reacting to being filmed in high stress raid situations. With reaction to that concern by citizen journalists. It's a very fluid area of public policy with the shadow of prescient George Orwell's 1984. What a man he was. If only medical science had been up to nurturing away from an early death.