Filter on hold until 2011, post election
July 9, 2010 – 10:04 pmby 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.
7 Responses to “Filter on hold until 2011, post election”
So, I take it that in practice this means that the RC classification will be widened to reflect ‘community standards’ (aka. what the ACL wants)?
By Stuart on Jul 9, 2010
Actually I’d say that in practice it’s an opportunity to indefinately stall an issue that isn’t very popular with voters.
The filter was an election promise, but since then people seem to have changed their minds and I think the govt is attempting to correct “misconceptions” (net slowdown, over-blocking, politically motivated blocking).
In a year’s time it could be possible that nobody will care about a years-old election promise and they co just move on to ISP voluntary code blocking. If the filter does come in however, the measures they’ve announced seem to at least ensure we will all know the sort of things that are being blocked.
Full list of the measures can be found here http://www.dbcde.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/129035/Outcome_of_public_consultation_on_measures_to_increase_accountability_and_transparency_for_refused_classification_material-web_version.pdf
By Tim on Jul 10, 2010
Yeah that sounds about right Stuart.
Though I find it amusing that Conroy’s Dad is actually on our side of the debate. Glorious!
I was also a lil worried that the fact that Gillard stated she wholeheartedly supports Kevin’s old censorship scheme wasn’t mentioned in any article before or during this one.
By jack tar on Jul 11, 2010
We all now realise why Conroy keeps his job. He is the king of the right of Labour, he is a factional heavyweight. Why the right killed Rudd and elected a leftie like Gillard is beyond me, except they may be pragmatic (Gillard being the most opposite of the Mad Monk labour has at the top). As for Conjob he may also be the king of branch stacking, a f*ckwit and a molester of innocent flowers.
Whatever, he will bring this stupid bible appeasing peace of democracy destruction back with “community (ACL Community) consultation” back ASATEP [As Soon As The Election Passes].
By Rhino on Jul 11, 2010
When the RC review gets going it will be vital to contribute submissions to counteract the influence of the ACL. We all know what would be left legal & accessible if they had their way. Our own lobbying efforts will become more important than ever.
By Fictitious1 on Jul 13, 2010
This must be the first time in history that a politician has actually wanted to keep an election promise.
While I have no desire to see a Liberal government, and a return to the Howard years, we can hope for a shift in the balance of power, such that this policy will remain “under review” until such time as it can be abandoned as unworkable, which it always was.
By Stephen on Jul 16, 2010
Wasn’t an election promise that they will offer an opt-out filtering? How do you come from “free to choose” to mandatory filtering?
By European on Jul 27, 2010