Sunday, May 9, 2010

The Internet filter double bill!

From the 'Open Internet for Australia' Facebook page today:


On ABC1 this evening both Four Corners and Q&A will focus on the Australian Government’s policy to introduce mandatory ISP-level Internet filtering.


On Four Corners, reporter Quentin McDermott will examine the filter in a story called "Access Denied":


A story that reveals how an apparently well meaning attempt by government to protect children from video nasties on the net turned into a policy that critics say promotes censorship and reduces personal freedom.


This follows a story today on the SMH about the true political motivations for the MISP filter:


Government tries to net votes in Howard’s domain:


The Rudd government’s internet filter has always been a kind of policy duck - flapping on the surface, quacking all the right things but with lots more happening underneath in the murky waters. It seems like a repeat of just the kind of expensive and more than likely ineffective policy that will create controversy in the future for the Rudd government. However obvious to the rest of us, it looks like Labor may have not got the memo. Reports are that Communications Minister Stephen Conroy is only delaying the fight over the filter until after the election where it might be in a better position to spin it their way and have no electoral repercussions. But with the obvious problems with the policy ahead, wouldn’t it just be better to ‘‘do an ETS’’ and cut their losses?


I asked this question in class a few weeks ago - if the research shows that the filter will clearly not do what the Government intends to set it up for, then what is the real reason they're pushing to set it up? Far from accepting any conspiracy theories about censorship and control, I've always suspected that it is simple politics. The MISP filter was seen as a relatively easy win with the electorate, especially when you frame the question as, "do you want to restrict access to child pornography?". But its not about winning points with the electorate, its about shoring up support with within the Labor factions and Family First.


Now its off the agenda till after the election, so the Government clearly misjudged the public reaction. Thanks to widespread media coverage on the inherent flaws of the MISP, coupled with the activism of protest movements such as Electronic Frontiers Australia and the Pirate Party, its fair to say that the general public have moved beyond the Government's black and white positioning of the proposal.

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Rudd retreats on web filter legislation

Looks like the MISP is on the back burner (how many back burners does Rudd have? Clearly he owns a Big Stove) till after the election:

Monday, April 26, 2010

Some interesting articles from the ARIN6902 Diigo site

Couple of things my fellow students have posted on Diigo recently that relate to the protest movements and ISP filter themes of this blog.

Firstly, some US stats on filtering software:


Next, an article from the OZ about our Government's 10th place ranking with Google for requesting content removal:


And finally, an article on Lifehacker listing 10 ways to access blocked content:


happy surfing...

Sunday, April 18, 2010

Larvatus Prodeo writes for EFA

Great Larvatus Prodeo post over the weekend, written for Electronic Frontiers Australia about the internet filter. Quite long, but here is a key quote:

“The Internet ... is part of that secular movement towards the democratisation of social relations; and of knowledge. It’s precisely because the Internet affords so much promise for those who wish to decide their destinies in common, to learn, to form an informed judgement and habit of thought that its freedom from state interference is so important at the level of principle.”

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

Hackers: not just geeks, but activists

Thanks to Elizabeth Gan for posting this article from the Toronto Star on the ARIN6902 Diigo list. It's about 'white hat' hackers who are helping to make the online world a better place. Of relevance in this article to my little blog about protest movements against internet censorship, is the work of Nart Villeneuve from the University of Toronto's Citizen Lab:

Nart Villeneuve, the chief research officer of Citizen Lab, is a self-taught coding expert. As an undergrad, he used his white hat skills to research Internet censorship by the Saudi Arabian and Chinese governments.

“I didn’t think you could make a living detecting Internet censorship,” Villeneuve says. He’s since unearthed two major cyber espionage rings and continues to study how governments monitor their citizens.

(from http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/791274--hackers-not-just-geeks-but-activists)

On Nart's site, he posts some very interesting articles about internet censorship, well worth a further read, especially his posts tagged 'censorship circumvention'

Meanwhile the Citizen Lab site covers the lab's broader work on "advanced research and development at the intersection of digital media, global security, and human rights".

Monday, April 12, 2010

US ambassador critical of Conroy's internet filters

Follow up article to Ambassador Bleich's appearance on Q&A last night, where he said the "internet has to be free" and that there were other means of combating nasty content such as child pornography. "We have been able to accomplish the goals that Australia has described, which is to capture and prosecute child pornographers ... without having to use internet filters" Surely a strong American stance against the MISP means no MISP...?

Net filters a 'modest measure': Conroy

Is Conroy backing down or just trying a new approach? the Minister has described the MISP as a 'modest measure' in a speech to the Sydney Institute last night, in an effort to make it sound like a perfectly normal - or uncontroversial - thing to do...

Thursday, April 8, 2010

Piers Ackerman vs. ISP filtering

Even Piers Ackerman thinks the Government's proposed ISP filtering is a bad idea! Possibly the first time I've ever been on the same side of a debate as Ackerman, makes me feel a little nauseous. Granted, this is really just another avenue of Rudd/Labor bashing for him, but it shows that there are people on both sides of the political divide who oppose internet censorship.

Ackerman's main points of concern are that the filtering would likely hobble the broadband scheme (in terms of speed) and is against the interests of business and our US allies - recurring issues in much of the discourse surrounding this debate. He also mentions some costs, which I haven't seen come up much so far - $43 billion for the broadband network, and $125.8 for the filtering scheme.

He also mentions an app called the Onion Router that allows anonymous access to web content, which I will look into and explore in an upcoming post. Happy Friday...


Wednesday, April 7, 2010

The Empire Strikes Back

on Punch today (April 7 2010) Senator the Hon Stephen Conroy, Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, responded to Eliza Cussen's article 'Top 10 Internet Filter Lies' from 25 March.

Cussen's 10 'lies' were:

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

Conroy's response, 'Don't believe the myths on the ISP filter' doesn't directly address each 'lie' point by point, but does cover most of them - how convincingly is up to the individual reader. As usual however, the most telling analysis is in the comments section of each article. Commenter 'Adam Diver' singles out this line from Conroy's article, "we have never said ISP-level filtering alone would help fight child pornography or keep children safe online" then asks, "So whats the point then Conroy?". What indeed? Commenter 'David' responds to 'Adam Diver' with the following interesting questions:

"Exactly Adam. If the filter isn’t going to work in preventing child porn and keep children safe then what is it for? Placation of conservative religious lobbies like the Australian Christian Lobby? They have demonstrated a level of knowledge about the filter unknown to the general public in the past…

Or maybe the filter is designed to empower content providers and marketing bodies in suring up the internet as a regulated medium with greater financial reward and capital…

I think the biggest kicker, and Conroy didn’t address this, is the lack of transparency and safety measures to prevent scope creep in the filter rules. Even if this does occur what is the capacity for the public to know? The list is secret and those employed to build and monitor the list will certainly be bound by contracts of confidentiality.

The whole filter is a massive trojan horse (of the ancient Greek variety not the computer virus)."

So if the filter won't perform the main task it is intended for, then what is it actually for?

Monday, April 5, 2010

Facebook v. ISP filtering... via Abbott

The Open Internet for Australia Facebook page has a special plea to all members to contact Tony Abbott and convince him of the folly of ISP filtering today after his comments on the ABC's Q&A last night. Also an interesting follow up article on the OZ. From the transcript of last night's show:

YIKEN YANG: Criticism of the internet filter policy being pushed by Chairman Rudd and Stephen Conroy is growing, with even Google weighing in on the debate. The opposition has been notoriously quiet on this issue and I was wondering what the stance of the Liberal party was. Thanks.

TONY ABBOTT: Well, look, I want to see protections in place. I don’t want to see our kids exposed to really terrible stuff on the internet. On the other hand, I don’t want to see the internet destroyed by a filtering system that won’t work, so I guess for me it’s a factual issue. Can you have a filtering system that is effective, that doesn’t lull parents into a false sense of security, and which doesn’t, in the process, make the internet ineffective as the kind of marvellous research tool and educational device as it is.

TONY JONES: And what’s the answer: you don’t know at the moment?

TONY ABBOTT: I don’t know at the moment. I just don’t know.

TONY JONES: Joe Hockey has got a pretty clear view on this. He says he regards the - in his speech, in defence of civil liberties, he said he regards the internet filter as a real problem because it is one of those things that puts the government on top of the freedom - in this case the freedom of the internet.

TONY ABBOTT: Yeah. As I understand it, the proponents of the filter are only trying to stop access to material that it would be a crime to possess anyway. That’s my understanding. Now, we haven’t seen legislation from the government. We certainly haven’t seen the kind of technical assurances that we’d need, so let’s wait and see how this thing develops, Tony.

No surprise to see that Abbott is waiting to see how this pans out - why come out with a position on it either way and draw attention away from all the flak Conroy is copping? Anyway, the Facebook page goes on to provide links to the 'lobby a Lib' section of the EFA site, then provides the contact details for Abbott's office too, which I'll repost here for good measure:

You can call Tony Abbott’s office on (02) 9977 6411.

Or you can send him an email at Tony.Abbott.MP@aph.gov.au.

Or you can write to him at:

The Hon Tony Abbott

PO Box 450

Manly NSW 2095


Can this issue gain enough traction with the so-called 'general' public to become an election winner/loser? The release of the responses to the Government's call for submissions on 'measures to increase accountability and transparency for Refused Classification material' shows that the business community, techies and other 'netizens' are firmly against the plan, but I wonder what the tabloid and talkback media consumers are thinking? Note to self, check the Daily Telegraph's website and Google to see if Alan Jones and his ilk have said anything of substance (a relative term I know...)

Tuesday, March 30, 2010

Your Rights Online: US-Australia Tensions Rise Over Net Filter

A really interesting conversation thread on Slashdot about the US Government's concern over Australian ISP filter proposals, and Conroy's denial that his office has been contacted. Posters discuss net neutrality, US and Chinese interests, ACTA, practical realities of filter implementation etc.:

Monday, March 29, 2010

US reveals concerns over Conroy’s net filter plan

A great article on the Punch yesterday about Australia's planned ISP filtering censorship:


From the article:
The US State Department has told The Punch its officials have raised concerns about the filter with Australian counterparts, as America mounts a new diplomatic assault on internet censorship by governments worldwide.

Asked about the US view on the filter plan US State Department spokesman Noel Clay said: “The US and Australia are close partners on issues related to cyber matters generally, including national security and economic issues.

“We do not discuss the details of specific diplomatic exchanges, but can say that in the context of that ongoing relationship, we have raised our concerns on this matter with Australian officials.”

Punch writer Paul Coglan also points out - and many of those involved in the protest movement against the ISP filtering do too - that the filtering will be quite easy to circumvent. Coglan goes on to say that even now, before the filters even exist, you can google work-arounds by searching "how to bypass the Australia ISP filter", which i did, and here are some results:



What's interesting about these links is that they're not from obscure sources - the first is from the Sydney Morning Herald, and the second is from PC Authority magazine. This indicative of the widespread disdain for the ISP filter project in the media and private sector. The PC Authority article even has a sponsored link to the No Clean Feed protest site.

Next post, I plan to write up a pretty comprehensive review of and guide to the No Clean Feed site, as it is one of the most organized and comprehensive resource sites for anti-ISP filter campaigners.

Sunday, March 28, 2010

R18+ protest in Sydney, Saturday 27/3/10

Not strictly my topic on the protest movement against the Government's proposed ISP filter censorship plan, but nonetheless indicative of the slow and unsophisticated Government reactions to new media regulation:

Tuesday, March 23, 2010

Crib Sheet: Google Vs. China (Vs. Australia?)

Some great analysis and summary from Fast Company on Google pulling the plug on their Chinese search engine, and how this relates to their submission to the Australian Government regarding their proposed ISP filtering.

If you're not familiar with Fast Company, this is how they modestly describe themselves:

"Fast Company sets the agenda, charting the evolution of business through a unique focus on the most creative individuals sparking change in the marketplace. By uncovering best and "next" practices, the magazine and website help a new breed of leader work smarter and more effectively.
Fast Company empowers innovators to challenge convention and create the future of business."

Monday, March 22, 2010

Submissions on ISP filtering released today

"Australia's biggest technology companies, communications academics and many lobby groups have delivered a withering critique of the government's plans to censor the internet." (quoting smh, 23/3/10, 4.40pm)


Including Google's submission:

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

The protest movement against internet censorship in Australia

There is a very active and passionate protest movement against the Australian Federal Government’s proposed ISP-based filter, which aims to block material deemed inappropriate for children. In other words, censorship of the internet for Australia.

Background:

A comprehensive history of Internet censorship in Australia has been compiled on Wikipedia. Here is a brief summary of the key milestones:

  • 1999: Federal Government fails to get internet censorship regime together as part of the sale of Telstra
  • 2001: CSIRO examines internet content filtering. Report evaluates the effectiveness of client-side filtering schemes (deemed ineffective) difficulties of ISP-based filtering
  • 2006: Labor party (in opposition) commits to requiring all ISPs to implement a mandatory Internet blocking system applicable to “all households, and to schools and other public internet points” to “prevent users from accessing any content that has been identified as prohibited by the Australian Communications and Media Authority”
  • 2007: Labor now in government, announces intention to introduce ISP-based filter with an ‘opt-out’ provision for adults
  • 2008: government commences $82m “cybersafety plan” including additional mandatory filter with no ‘opt-out’ provision.
  • Jan 2010: a Labor senator lobbies her party to include the "opt-out" filter when the legislation is debated in caucus, describing it as the "least worst" option

Protest Action:

To date, the protest actions which have received the most national and international media coverage are the cyber attacks on Government websites by the activist group Anonymous. The first attack occurred on 26 March 2009, when visitors to the Australian Government Classification website were redirected to a hacked version of the site’s content. Then on 9 September 2009 Anonymous initiated a Distributed Denial of Service attack against the website of the Australian Prime Minister, in a campaign called ‘Operation Didgeridie’. Then on 10 September 2010, the Australian Parliament’s website was endured a distributed denial of service attack for over two days, as part of a wider campaign that included ‘blackfaxes’ (solid black pages faxed to various government offices), prank calls and spam emails. This campaign was dubbed ‘Operation titstorm’, referring to the Government's banning of pornography featuring small-breasted women.

Protest movement:

These are the sites I’ve found so far that are either directly concerned with the issues of protesting Australian internet censorship or feature ‘3rd party’ reports/content about the issue:

Civil liberties, anti-censorship and protest sites:

http://www.efa.org.au/about/

http://openinternet.com.au/

http://opennet.net/

http://www.myspace.com/nocleanfeed

http://www.internetblackout.com.au/

http://www.thegiftofcensorship.com/

http://www.lifehacker.com.au/2009/12/how-to-protest-against-internet-censorship-laws/


Pages about Australian internet censorship issue and/or protests:

http://amyclaire01.tumblr.com/post/403295185/regulation-of-the-internet-and-how-this-will-effect

http://www.infowars.com/internet-censorship-protest-shuts-down-australian-government-websites/


Government and pro-filtering sites:

http://www.dbcde.gov.au/internet/online_content_regulation

http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD..PC/pc=PC_311304

http://www.iia.net.au/

http://www.familyfirst.org.au/policy/policypornography.pdf


International comparisons:

I think it will be worthwhile to look at the US and China’s internet censorship policies and issues as part of a comparative analysis of the Australian situation, so I’ve started with the links below and will explore further:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_the_United_States

http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/internet-censorship

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_the_People's_Republic_of_China

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filtering/china/


So that’s some initial research and broad areas of interest defined. In future posts I’ll take a more in depth look at some of the sites listed above and the issues they cover.

Topic assigned - protest movements

ok, finally this blog has a purpose! I've been assigned the topic of 'protest movements' to write about, and I need to post at least 1 link per week on the Diigo group for the course too.

As this is a course on Internet Cultures and Governance, I'm going to focus on the recent and ongoing protests against proposed internet filtering legislation - the so-called 'clean feed'.

Watch this space...

Thursday, March 4, 2010

ARIN 6902 Internet Cultures & Governance

...is the course I've set this blog up for. Its an elective unit of my Masters of Media Practice at the University of Sydney: www.sydney.edu.au/arts/digital_cultures

Have also had to sign up to diigo.com, soup.io and even Twitter(!) - i know, I know...

Not sure what we'll be using the blog for yet as there's only been one intro seminar, but it looks like it'll be a very interesting course and I'm looking forward (no, really) to using all these online tools I've thus far managed to avoid and/or have had nor use for...

First past the post

well here we go; a reluctant blogger, wary of content for content's sake, needs to set up a blog as part of course at University...