Somebody Think Of The Children

L.A. Zombie banned at Melbourne International Film Festival

July 21, 2010 – 8:21 am

The Australian Classification Board has banned L.A. Zombie from screening at the Melbourne International Film Festival. According to The Age, the ACB refused to issue an exemption for the festival to show the film based ‘on information submitted by MIFF,  inspection of the film and the classification history of the director”.

Festival director Richard Moore told The Age that ‘Bruce LaBruce’s blend of sex  and violence can be confronting’, but he argues that within the  context of the festival, it is ‘nonsensical and patronising to not allow  people to decide what they want to see’.

By taking a look at the photo gallery on the film’s official website, it’s easy to see why L.A Zombie would have had the ACB squirming in their seats; There’s leather, guns and dongs. Multiple types of flesh eating too.

Another case of the Walking Braindead in the annals of Australian   censorship history.

Posted in Film Censorship | No Comments »

Filter on hold until 2011, post election

July 9, 2010 – 10:04 pm

by Tim Biggs

The Federal Government’s mandatory internet filter will not likely be introduced for a year, until after a review of what content would be blocked.

Stephen Conroy today announced a new set of ‘transparency and accountability’ measures that will be introduced alongside the filter, and chief among them are changes to the Refused Classification guidelines.

“Some sections of the community have expressed concern about whether the range of material included in the RC category currently reflects community standards”, Senator Conroy said.

His department is recommending an independent review of what the community deems to be inappropriate content. Senator Conroy expects the review to take around a year, and the filter will not be introduced during this time.

In the interim, several big ISPs including Telstra, Optus and Primus have agreed to voluntarily block a list of child porn and child abuse URLs provided by the government.

Maha Krishnapillai, Optus’ Director of Government and Corporate affairs, said he was very supportive of the measures.

“There have been a lot of misconceptions about what kind of things will be blocked, and that we are the ones who are blocking them”, he said.

“If people want to look at (content that’s currently rated RC), that’s ok, we don’t care. So if the review comes back and says that stuff’s ok it will be ok.”

In many European countries ISPs block content according to a voluntary code, without mandatory filtering or government involvement.

Mr Krishnapillai said he imagines a similar system will eventually be implemented in Australia.

“We have a long way to go before we get there. These are just the first steps.”

Blocking will be accomplished simply using a list of URLs known to contain RC content, meaning slow-down to internet speeds will not be noticeable.

When the filter is introduced, measures will come in alongside it including a notification to the owner of the page before it is blocked, an appeal and review mechanism, industry consultation on technical issues and the immediate classification of any pages that are complained about by public.

Attempting to access a blocked URL will display a page giving detailed information on why it was blocked, and the ACMA website will frequently update an exhaustive list of reasons why a website may be blocked.

Senator Conroy denied that these changes are being instituted as an election issue, though given his focus on clearing up ‘misconceptions’ about the filter, it seems likely the aim is to appease the voters.

He also said the filter is not designed as a “silver bullet” that will make accessing the internet safe, but it is a major part of a multi-million dollar plan that also includes education, training and increased online law enforcement.

Posted in Internet Censorship | 7 Comments »

Four Corners and Q&A look at Rudd’s net censorship plans

May 10, 2010 – 5:50 pm

Just a quick reminder folks that both Four Corners and Q&A on ABC this evening (Monday, May 10) are about Labor’s Internet censorship policy (which is still very much on their agenda, despite some reports claiming it’s been ditched).

You can tune into Four Corners at 8:30PM and Q&A at 9:35PM, both on ABC1.

Four Corners will provide what looks to be a good overview of the Government’s plan to filter the web, including how much that plan has changed since it was first announced. Meanwhile, Minister for Home Affairs Brendan O’Connor, Shadow Minister for Innovation Sophie Mirabella, Beijing-based internet consultant Kaiser Kuo, Internet activist Brett Solomon and commentator Helen Razer will take questions on Q&A. There’s a bingo card to play along with as well.

For International readers, both shows should be available to download not too long after.

Posted in Internet Censorship | 6 Comments »

Giveaway: Ticket to Sydney IQ2Oz net censorship debate, May 11

May 5, 2010 – 7:37 pm

Update 6:40PM May 6: Ticket is still available. I can’t make it down to Sydney next week as planned, so my ticket to IQ2 Oz’s Governments should not censor the Internet debate to be held at Angel Place (Tuesday May 11 at 6:30PM) is up for grabs. The only catch is I’d like the winner to write a brief review of the event to be published on this blog. If that sounds like you, email me your details and I’ll express post the ticket.

Speaking against net censorship is journo and author Antony Loewenstein, Google’s Ross LaJeunesse and David Marr. For is Professor and Associate Dean of Law at Flinders University, Elizabeth Handsley, Beijing-based columnist Kaiser Kuo and Alastair MacGibbon, founder of the Internet Safety Institute and Managing Partner of internet consultancy the Surete Group.

When I bought the ticket back in January Senator Conroy was set to speak. Unfortunately, he’s pulled out (for whatever reason). Nevertheless, there’s still a great range of range of high-profile and knowledgeable speakers so I’m sure it’ll be interesting

Event details:

Governments should not censor the internet

May 11, 6:30PM
City Recital Hall Angel Place
2-12 Angel Place
Sydney

Architects of the internet have championed its promise as an instrument of liberty – a free-wheeling republic in which the ordinary person can bypass the gatekeepers of power and influence.

Beneath the shiny towers of liberty electronic sewers run thick with child pornography, terrorist propaganda, racial hatred, crazy conspiracies and other products of the grimy denizens of the internet’s underworld.

Some governments think that they should protect us from what they deem to be harmful to the common weal.

Can we not be trusted to care for ourselves? And if not, then will censorship inevitably shut out the light along with the dark?

It is important that audience members are seated by 6.35pm as the event will be screened live.

You can also buy yourself a ticket here.

Posted in Events, Internet Censorship | 4 Comments »

Conroy to debate Newton, Lumby, Jacobs on Radio National

March 28, 2010 – 4:17 pm

Senator Conroy will debate ISP filtering with Colin Jacobs from Electronic Frontiers Australia, network engineer Mark Newton and Professor Catharine Lumby on Radio National this Monday the 29th of March at 6PM AEDT. Michael Grace from Internet filtering and web access company Netsweeper will also be on. The full details are on the Australia Talks website, but remember you can listen online here or call in on 1300 22 55 76.

Posted in Internet Censorship | 8 Comments »

Conroy attempts to sell filter on 7PM Project as Google slams the plan

March 23, 2010 – 11:06 pm

In his first major TV appearance regarding the filter since Q&A and Insight in early 2009, Senator Conroy will head back to the tube Wednesday evening in an attempt to sell government’s mandatory net censorship plan to the masses on Channel 10′s The 7PM Project. A rare occurrence for a Minister we are used to seeing tight-lipped and mediaphobic after criticism of his plan. I guess it’s hard to avoid when the criticism is coming from the likes of Google.

In public submissions on ‘measures to increase accountability and transparency for Refused Classification material’ released today by the DBCDE, Google said moving to a mandatory ISP level filtering regime with a scope that goes well beyond child pornography is heavy handed and can raise genuine questions about restrictions on access to information.

Our primary concern is that the scope of content to be filtered is too wide.

Yahoo! agreed:

Yahoo! are entirely supportive of any effort to make the Internet a safer place for children, however mandatory filtering of all RC material could block content with a strong social, political and/or educational value such as:

• Safe injecting and other harm minimisation websites,

• Euthanasia discussion forums,

• A video on creating graffiti art,

• Anti-abortion websites,

• Gay and lesbian forums which discuss sexual experiences,

• Explorations of the geo-political causes of terrorism where specific terrorist organisation, and propaganda is cited as reference material.

Read all of the submissions here and remember: If you’re in the mood, watch Senator Conroy on The 7Pm Project, Wednesday 24/03/10 at 7PM AEST, Channel 10. Just don’t expect anything new.

Posted in Internet Censorship | 24 Comments »

Parents outraged at Lady Gaga concert: Calls for concerts to be classified

March 19, 2010 – 8:00 am

There’s news this morning that some parents who took their tween children to Aussie Lady Gaga concerts are gagging because of the adult nature of the concert. Rewind. Yes they are upset because a performer, renowned for her racy costumes and hybrid-burlesque-strip-show music videos, put on a concert that was probably best left to adults to see. They now want concerts to be classified just like movies and TV shows.

According to News.com.au, Linda Fitzsimmons took her nine-year-old daughter Jessica to the debut show on Wednesday and said that she was “shocked and surprised” by it.

“I couldn’t believe it. (Jessica) likes her songs and I’m OK with her listening to them. There’s no swearing in them and she’s too young to understand the hidden meaning,” she said. “But if I tried to take her to an MA 15+ movie someone would stop me at the counter. Why not with concerts?”

Linda is okay with her nine-year-old daughter listening to lyrics about riding disco sticks and she admits the songs have a hidden meaning, so how about also taking the time to research what the video clips are like that accompany each of the songs. Lady Gaga isn’t exactly what I’d call discreet. Getting an idea of the visual elements might have given her an idea of what the concert would be like. Even a browse through the magazines at her local news agent would have shown Gaga in a number of raunchy, revealing costumes. Not exactly a sign the concert will be of a Wiggles nature.

Lady Gaga's Sydney Concert. Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mixvio/4443225938/ CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/

Linda aside, Promoter Michael Coppel says rating concerts won’t happen. He doubted that Australian tours would ever carry classifications, because most promoters do not see the show before they book it.

The Classification Board obviously chose not weigh in because it isn’t their area, but get this: Even Steve Fielding refused to throw his two cents into the ring. This is a man who feeds on this nonsense. It’s like water and air to him. Someone please check he is okay.

Posted in Music Censorship, Parental outrage | 21 Comments »

Fielding beats Ludlam to a seat on Cyber-Safety Committee

March 16, 2010 – 8:43 pm

Update 17 March 2010: Here’s some interesting news. Ludlam has now won the seat, previously reported as being awarded to Senator Fielding. Senator Fielding – 35 votes, Senator Ludlam – 37 votes. Was this a revote?

Family First Senator Steve Fielding has won a seat reserved for minor party and independent senators on the Joint Select Committee on Cyber-Safety. He beat Greens Senator Scott Ludlam by two votes.

AAP reports:

A ballot was held in the upper house on Tuesday to decide which minor party or independent senator would be appointed to a federal parliamentary committee on cyber-safety.

In a very close secret vote, Senator Fielding was awarded the job with 34 votes to Senator Ludlam’s 32.

The Joint Select Committee on Cyber-Safety will look at online bullying, stalking, sexual grooming, the development of addictions, identity theft and privacy breaches.

The committee, which was proposed by Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government Anthony Albanese, will investigate and report on:

• abuse of children online (cyber-bullying, cyber-stalking and sexual grooming);
• exposure to illegal and inappropriate content;
• inappropriate social and health behaviours in an online environment (e.g. technology addiction, online promotion of anorexia, drug usage, underage drinking and smoking);
• identity theft; and
• breaches of privacy.
• increasing awareness of cyber-safety good practice;
• encouraging schools to work with the broader school community, especially parents, to develop consistent, whole school approaches; and
• analysing best practice approaches to training and professional development programs and resources that are available to enable school staff to effectively respond to cyber-bullying.

Of course, Albanese also noted that the government will introduce into parliament legislation for mandatory ISP level filtering.

Posted in Internet Censorship, Safety and Education | 15 Comments »

Classification Board squirms over vagina censorship in this Hungry Beast interview

March 5, 2010 – 8:06 am

The ABC’s Hungry Beast recently conducted an extensive interview with the Australian Classification Board’s Greg Scott about the censorship of the female anatomy, in particular the vagina. It’s part of a story on Labiaplasty. I suggest you watch it below and read the complete transcript here (as well as check out interviews with a doctor and soft porn graphic artist here).

When shown images of female genitalia, it’s no surprise that Mr Scott is unable a lot of the time to give a definite and clear response as to whether the image would be banned. It’s another case of the ACB’s lack of clear guidelines resulting in some pretty inconsistent decision making. Mr Scott even acknowledges the fact:

Hungry Beast: I guess just a clear explanation of what genital detail means? Cos while I mean, there’s clear guidelines for you guys some of the words used are quite vague-

Greg Scott: Yeah yeah, well they’re vague for us too sometimes.

And don’t we know it.

Check out the blog of Hungry Beast reporter Kirsten Drysdale for some further insight.

Posted in Book Censorship, Censorship Policy, Health Censorship | 15 Comments »

Classifiers refuse to comment on breast size specifics: Look young and you’re banned

February 1, 2010 – 6:28 pm

The Australian Classification Board (ACB) has confirmed to Somebody Think Of The Children that a person’s overall appearance is used by the Board to determine whether someone appears to look under the age of 18 in a film or publication.

A spokesperson for the Board said the overall appearance of persons in publications in conjunction with the context in which they are depicted, including text, props and poses were considered when making their decisions.

Donald McDonald, Director, Australian Classification Board

However, the Director of the Australian Classification Board, Donald McDonald, refused to answer repeated questions from this blog about the specifics of breast size in deciding on a person’s apparent age. Asked whether breast size was considered by the Board when determining age, McDonald said he had no further comment to make.

Adult with an I.D? No Dice:

In Australia the National Classification Code dictates that anything that describes or depicts a person who appears to be a child under 18, even if they are an adult, in a way that is likely to cause offence, must be banned. State Criminal Acts are stricter, with for example Victoria’s, South Australia’s and Queensland’s child pornography laws making depictions of adults that appear to be underage illegal.

Last week news broke that the Board was banning publications which contained models who appeared to be underage because of their small breasts. Although these rules are not new, it was not necessarily known what criteria the ACB was using to determine a model’s age.

Because the Board’s guidelines do not specify breast size or what appearance constitutes a person under the age of 18, the process for determining a subject’s age is likely to be subjective and inconsistent.

The ACB said that Barely Legal, Purely 18 and Finally Legal magazine titles were banned because they contained a person that appeared to be under 18, the Board said some of these issues were Refused Classification (RC refers to items banned for sale in Australia) because they contained offensive depictions of someone who was or appeared to be under 18 years. Other issues were classified RC for offensive fantasies involving rape and incest.

Huge public response:

In a press release issued last week by the the Australian Sex Party, and in further detail here, Fiona Patten described how during a Classification Board training session, which she and three adult magazine distributors and one publisher attended, the underdeveloped nature of a model’s breasts was cited as a reason for an image to be Refused Classification numerous times. A massive worldwide response to the story followed, with traffic placing so much stress on this blog that it suffered downtime on multiple occasions.

Colin Jacobs, Vice Chair of Electronic Frontiers Australia, said the Classification Board has a duty to be transparent with the public about what is being censored and why.

“A process as subjective as determining the apparent age of a model is really a very problematic basis for a classification guideline, and this demonstrates it perfectly,” he said. “We don’t blame the Board for enforcing the law, but we do blame them if they aren’t forthcoming on how or why they’re enforcing it in this case. The only reason censorship is compatible with democracy is that it’s transparent.”

Posted in Censorship Policy, Film Censorship | 34 Comments »