Atheist Age

ISP Filter or Censorship?

Audio from Tuesday November 18th, 2008.

Despite being described yesterday as “in shreds”, the governments ISP filter was announced originally in December 2007 by Stephen Conroy, minister for broadband, communications and the digital economy as part of the Cyber Safety Plan. A three page PDF fact sheet on internet censorship has been prepared by Get Up; Action for Australia.

---

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

  Or direct download [42.3 MB. 1hr, 22 min]

---

Smaller file available here [30 MB]

---

It is worth noting it’s almost a year since it was pointed out to Conroy that outside of nations that value free speech and information access, countries like China, Iran, Myanmar, Tibet, Singapore, Nth. Korea, etc actually do have such a level of control. Unlike the above however, content filtering in our case is not a restriction at all. It’s for our own good. Exactly why Aussies are unable to exercise responsible, mature decisions and must be assumed gullible ‘victims in waiting’ is yet to be made clear by Conroy. Or indeed by any of the supporters of this measure, particularly those emboldened by Howard’s marathon and politically insouciant use of God.

Conroy has described concerns by civil libertarians as “nonsense”. Yet a critical analysis leaves one wondering if anything beyond a vague subjective criteria, ideally suited to chaste conservative values, is what we’ll be left dealing with. Conroy shows little knowledge of the technology, failing absolutely to answer concerns put to him in Parliament, as we’ll hear, by Senator Scott Ludlam of The Greens. Conroy had claimed Canada, Finland, Denmark, Norway, France and New Zealand have ISP level content blocking. This is false, with the closest similarity being an Opt In service offered in New Zealand.

A range of problems already define this experiment in experiments. Large scale slow down of internet speeds, the fact ISP’s must check hundreds of thousands of URL’s – many of which appear/disappear/change rapidly, technology is inadequate at best and laughable at worst. It has not been proven effective and may well be another Bayesian application subject to the human foibles of subjective moderator interpretation; the hit-n-miss objective probability that has real banks reminding us to check our “junk” folders for email invoices relating to actual transactions. One ISP expert, Daniel Myers, claims slow downs of up to 87% are possible. Exactly what the ‘slow down’ could be managed at I’ve no idea, but that “87%” will likely make a few rounds. A Tasmanian trial has already demonstrated a slow down of internet speed, hence access by over 30%. “Cheap tricks” is how Stilgherian describes the plan in Crikey.

Conroy has countered by beefing up the importance of the industry level “consultative approach” which is apparently the answer to our concerns about the viability of a contract at the ISP level, and reliable feedback from ISP’s in the first place. “Live pilot studies” targetting “mostly child porn” of 1,300 URL’s have been done and up to 10,000 URL’s will also be trialled with the aim of quantifying speed reduction. Unresolved questions about various connections, particularly above 12 MB, remain unanswered. Conroy refused to answer if he’d retract his false claim on European and other nations, exactly what “unwanted content” means, if the filter is akin to “opening every piece of mail in a post office” or indeed anything remotely enlightening, whilst showing a startling lack of technological awareness.

He will consider such wide ranging implications and return with an answer. In fact, a disturbing amount of subjectivity seems to be driving this digital overseer of our moral deportment. The widely sweeping yet absurd proposition in it’s present form has been welcomed by religious groups waving the family values banner. The Australian Christian Lobby, Focus on the Family, the Australian Family Association – perhaps not representing all families – the Fatherhood Foundation, Festival of Light [now Family Voice Australia], Salt Shakers and similar groups are keen to see “the greater good” imposed.

In short, removal of many and hard won civil liberties and agitation for discrimination against falsely labelled “immoral” minority groups. Perhaps though it’s not an ideal departmental image for “health ambassadors” to be homophobic, as Nicola Roxon is presently digesting, particularly in the ‘post Howard years’. A PM who advised – to applause – that “a properly functioning family is the best social welfare system mankind has ever devised”, may have been receptive to the soft end of the divisive family value meme or it’s cousin, the appalling new ‘science’ of homophobia. With him having written about religious right influences when in Opposition one hopes Kevin Rudd’s government will move us on from unacceptable Howard residue that Labor is no doubt cognizant of.

“Gender identity crises” and homosexuality can be cured by prayer, and is a “trendy” new mistake that has taken hold. Faith cures addiction and psychological/psychiatric illness. Exorcisms, baptisms, prayer sessions, demon management and combinations thereof have emerged unashamedly as “treatment” applied by G.P.’s and unqualified zealots alike. It is simply wrong to consider abortion, divorce, gay marriage, equal rights, sex education, safe risk taking or premarital sex. “Creation science” is drawing support and we scarcely blink at “Why Gay Marriage is Harmful” or “21 Reasons why gender matters“. Homosexuality is fallaciously “linked” to violence, child abuse, sexual abuse, pedophilia, unemployment, drug abuse, alcoholism… in short dysunctionality and deviance.

Senator Conroy: […] I trust you are not suggesting that people should have access to child pornography.

Senator Ludlam: No. That is why I was interested in asking about the law enforcement side of it as well.

Senator Conroy: No, we are working both angles at it. We are just trying to use technology to enforce the existing laws.

Senator Ludlam: I am just wondering if I can put these questions to you without being accused of being pro child pornography. That would assist.

Senator Conroy: I was wondering if I could get the questions without being accused of being the Great Wall of China. [Source]

In the binary opposite environment of “family values” – qualified by the bottomless pit of moral despair in which dwells that which they apparently are not – it isn’t difficult to allude to the simple intuitive illusion that to be anti censorship in this respect, is to be pro deviance. Our Christian guardians of all things social are ready with advice on how we can conform, convert and contract our view of the world.

It’s the “Christian voice in politics” we must support. We need the “godly influence” that stands admirably between us and utter moral oblivion, as “scientific materialism” and “Darwinism” drive us further from the Dark Ages. We must pray for the Christian lobby and their political dealings in the ACT, the latter which – thanks to laws on same sex couples – “has become a cesspit of iniquity”. Sounding akin to Sharia law, this dire need to reclaim a rightful God given control in policy formation once voiced an eerily familiar logic. New Life magazine which “aims to bring people the news the secular media doesn’t cover”, published on September 5th 2002, that Christian values in politics should be a part of government, business and the community.

This episode we explore the ISP filtering scheme, various aims and opinions around chaste social deportment and the tangled web of the religious right. The reasons as to why any tolerant democracy can manage the reality of progressive humane communities are axiomatic. It is the motives behind those who would seek to censor what others may see, learn, discuss, debate or simply consider consensually and benignly, we must regard with extreme skepticism.

For it is not just the control of appropriately themed information, but the restriction of unbridled access to knowledge that promotes ignorance. And of many opposing forces – often simply labelled ‘the enemies of reason’ – that resonate with archaic notions like heresy and suppression of critical or free thought, it is ignorance that I’d argee is a most durable foe.

Tags: Christianity, Critical Thought, Human Rights, Podcast, Politics