[LINK] Senate Standing Committee: NetAlert/Mandatory filtering
mike at somebodythinkofthechildren.com
Tue Feb 19 16:42:44 EST 2008
Rick Welykochy wrote:
> Ah, so the blocker can be circumvented. Child pornographers will still
> be able to access their kiddy pr0n. This should be made public. And
> shoveled into Conroy's bullshit hopper.
It's what I've been saying since Bernadette McMenamin said a mandatory
filtering was needed to protect children. With mandatory filtering in
place those who produce and distribute C/P will still be able to do it,
those who view C/P will still be able to view it, and worst of all the
children who are abused will still be abused. Mandatory filtering does
little more than levitate the morals of churches and family groups to
that of legislation.
Stil's article in Crikey last month may have had something about
circumvention being easy? I've also mentioned it any media contact I've had.
> This is what I was getting at, actually. There are many good reasons for
> transparency and openness with a blocking system like this. It is a
> technical system to implement and requires validation and certifications
> from experts.
An open reporting system like the Classification Board has should be
required. Would it? It wouldn't even come close.
More information about the Link