[LINK] the Bill Henson 'mistake' - Conroy

[stephen at melbpc.org.au]

Jan forwards,

> Yesterday, Conroy said public concern about the possibility of the 
> blacklist "creeping" to include legal content was justified, but 
> stopped short of guaranteeing the Government would be able to prevent
> it.

So, our government admit 'bracket-creep' blacklist fears are justified.

Good. Surely 'independant from the government' assessments of potential 
inappropriate content, eg, by the Judiciary (with an agreed, and public 
guideline for inclusion or not) would mean the gov would lessen concern.

Judges are paid by us to adjudicate if laws have been broken. And we do
accept their opinion or appeal if not. But, it's independant of any gov
either now, or in the future. (Shudders to think what Johnny might have
wanted included in the backlist).

It seems obvious it must be a job for truly independant bodies. Conroy
has admitted there's a conflict of interest problem here and he's right.

What public servant is likely to disagree, if goverment wants something
blocked?

> The Government plans to expand the blacklist to up to 10,000 sites 
> and has said it plans to incorporate sites found on international
> blacklists.

I guess that's a problem .. the gov wants to include too many sites for
filtering, so that independant review by legal professionals may become
too onerous & expensive for the budget they want to throw at blacklists.

Maybe as one example of what govs might want for all, have a look here:

 http://www.studysearch.com.au

And enter the word 'Nazi' Haha. Not even the Uni search finds anything.

Guess even Johnny would have been very pleased indeed with the service.

Cheers,
Stephen