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?
No comments:
Post a Comment