[LINK] Senate Standing Committee: NetAlert/Mandatory filtering
mike at somebodythinkofthechildren.com
Tue Feb 19 17:33:35 EST 2008
Jan Whitaker wrote:
> I think different things are getting confused in all this, or maybe I
> just don't get it or am putting my own filter on it. [pun intended]
> Is the program to protect children from accessing nasties OR is it a
> block from those who would access the kid pr0n, thereby reducing the
> 'benefit' to those who make the "$billions" each year from it? The
> first is a parental overstep by the government. The second is a
> moralistic restriction like is sometimes used in control of
> prostitution -- arresting the johns, concentrating on reducing demand
> and starving the sellers. Which is it?
It's a combination, Jan.
1) To "protect children" from viewing legal but 'inappropriate content'
(such as pro anorexia websites in Senator Fielding's case), X Rated
content and violent content.
2) To restrict Australia's access to sites considered illegal (primarily
C/P but not limited to it). Of course, the filter can still be bypassed
and the sites can still be accessed. In the case of illegal sites, the
core problem is already dealt with by law enforcement groups and the
ACMA is nothing more than a censor.
More information about the Link