Regular readers will know that I am against the plan to censor access to the internet here in Australia. It’s not that I don’t agree with some of the root issues – but that I think it’s far more effective and beneficial to educate not just the kids who are now beginning to access the web, but their parents as well.
As reported by Whitney Edwards recently, a number of high school students were suspended for hacking their Department of Education issued laptops. Despite what I expect would be quality system based controls and underlying technologies, these breaches demonstrate the importance of educating for BEHAVIOUR not mandating rules. After all, trying to stop people from doing something (especially those prone to pushing the envelope or experimenting with their skills/capabilities) often appears to be a red rag to a bull.
This morning Eliza Cussen shares the top 10 internet filter lies that have been pushed by filter proponents (the chief of whom is Senator Stephen Conroy). Read the whole article here. The lies, in order of appearance are:
Lie # 1: The filter will help in the fight against child pornography.
Lie # 2: The filter won’t slow connection speeds.
Lie #3: Conroy’s filter will stop your kids viewing harmful stuff online.
Lie #4: The filter has been proven in Government trials.
Lie #5: This plan is no different to what is already done with books and films.
Lie #6: The ISP filter is similar to ones in other Western democracies.
Lie #7: The filter will not make the internet more expensive.
Lie #8: If you’re anti mandatory filtering you’re pro child porn.
Lie #9: The filter would be impenetrable.
Lie #10: An ISP filter is the best option out there.
So tell me. Do you believe the lies? Do you believe the responses? Like any complex problem – there is no simple solution, but education and empowerment are the way forward.
One thought on “Top 10 Internet Filter Lies”
Could not agree more. I personally dont even want to accidentally come across the material they say they are filtering – who would? My concern however it will just about 100% for sure go beyond that. Take for example what happened in New Zealand. First they bought it in without actually telling anyone. And their filtering contains many many more sites not banned by other developed counties like England. One can only wonder exactly what material is OK in England but not New Zealand. Maybe its small breasted women that could be mistaken for underage? That really has made us a laughing stock overseas. The fact the sites are secret as well is also very disturbing.
I suspect though it wont get through the senate – thankfully.
Comments are closed.