The Internet is a monster loose in suburbia
March 5, 2008 – 9:47 pmWhen it comes to reporting news about the Internet, the media hasn’t progressed very far from the days of gloomy Time magazine covers and articles on how your child is building bombs using lemons and baking soda. Tonight’s 7:30 Report on Australia’s Clean Feed proposal might suggest the ABC hasn’t moved at all.
It used all the same tactics that fear-the-web stories like to splash across screen: Flashing ‘XXX’ banners that haven’t been used since 1995, women with large breasts and obscenely red hair, porn sites, and more flashing XXX banners.
Blended together with sound bites of concerned parents and Michael Flood, ABC produced Australia’s most poorly investigated Net piece since Today Tonight’s story on the Internet dating sites out to steal your heart and money.
To top it off, Journo Mark Bannerman used this cracker of a closer for his report:
…Michael Flood has some bad news. There is effectively a monster loose in suburbia.
Make the Internet appear to be a human threat (or maybe that’s a monster threat?) and you strike fear into the hearts of twice as many parents.
Lock your doors folks. Not because of the Internet monster, but because someone else is trying to look after your kids for you.
Watch the report on this site or read the 7:30 Report transcript: Govt moves to improve porn filter.
- Mike
Update 1:03PM/ March 6: Bob Bain points out that even Kerry O’Brien’s introduction to the report contains inaccuracies:
KERRY O’BRIEN: Under current state laws it’s illegal to walk into a shop and buy an X-rated video, yet anyone able to log on to the Internet has access to a veritable avalanche of pornographic images.
It is in fact NOT illegal to walk into a shop and purchase an X-Rated film. It is illegal to sell it. Purchasing or owning an X-Rated film is not illegal in any Australian State.
Update 4:20 PM/ March 7: Michael Flood has informed me that the comment ‘a monster loose in suburbia’ was not his. It was created by the narrator. The fact Mark Bannerman preceded the phrase with Michael Flood has some bad news, lead me to believe it was a comment made by Mr Flood.
Michael Flood said he did state that porn is having an increasing, and negative influence in young men?s peer cultures, something he stands by. As a result this blog post has been updated to reflect the new information.
6 Responses to “The Internet is a monster loose in suburbia”
Describing me as a “porn hater” is highly inaccurate. I’ve argued publicly and in my writings for defending adults’ access to X-rated materials, both offline and online. And at the same time, I’ve argued for regulating minors’ exposure, both accidental and deliberate, to sexually explicit materials. I’ve been critical of aspects of commercial heterosexual porn, drawing on feminist critiques. And I’ve argued for expanding sexuality education among children and youth.
Regards,
michael flood.
By Michael Flood on Mar 7, 2008
Thanks for jumping in Michael. I’m sorry if you disagree with the term porn hater – but I tend to believe you do in fact dislike pornography.
Defending access to view porn and arguing for sexuality education, doesn’t mean you don’t object to porn.
I’ll defend people’s right to view most content, but it doesn’t mean I like what they’re viewing. I may even hate it.
Taking your word for it though, I’ve now removed that comment.
To say there’s a very well documented, consistent link in the research between exposure particularly to violent pornography and sexually aggression, both sexually aggressive attitudes and sexually aggressive behaviour, may also be considered highly inaccurate. You of all people know there are just as many studies that report otherwise.
Whatever the case, the issue at hand is mandatory filtering — which is not a solution to any of the problems you bring up. Mandatory filtering will only block an extremely small amount of porn sites and even then access will still be available via a number of methods. You cannot restrict deliberate access on the Internet and you certainly can’t make a dent in accidental access. Maybe a study of how many children accidentally access pornography would be a worthwhile?
BTW, I must commend you on the Monster Loose In Suburbia comment. It’s a journalist’s wet dream to hear something like that come out of an interviewee’s mouth.
Edit to add a link for anyone interested in porn/violence studies: http://libertus.net/censor/fallacies.html and http://libertus.net/censor/studies.html
By Mike on Mar 7, 2008
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2625&page=0
Failure to filter allows child porn a free run
By Michael Flood – posted Thursday, 7 October 2004
————
The use of more complex filtering technologies – ones that analyse the text and images on particular web pages – will be feasible in
ISP-based filtering by 2006, by which time computer processing power will have increased sufficiently so that these systems can be used
nationally.
ISP-based filtering would allow us to regulate the content available to Australian computer-users in a similar way to the system used for
television and video. ISPs would filter their content to screen out child pornography and other illegal material. Using a system like the
one that some states have for X-rated videos, pornographic material would only be available to adults who choose to receive it by opting
out of filtering, and they could see only classified content.
————-
Bob’s comment:-
a) as far as I know there are no “complex filtering technologies – ones that analyse text and images on particular web pages” available
in 2008 – let alone “by 2006″
b) “they could see only classified content” !
classified by who and under what standard….. ? They may indeed have been rated – in Germany or Japan and perfectly legal in the United States, France (very liberal) or Germany or Japan.
If it’s the standards that apply in New South Wales – and assuming these are “the standards of morality” that apply in New South Wales
then Dr. Flood is pursuing false beliefs – not only technological beliefs but moral ones.
——————–
As Dr. Flood states…
“Walk into an ‘adult’ store and you will see collections of X-rated videos in such series as Teenerama, Kinky Teens, Seventeen, Barely
Legal, Schoolgirls, Teeny Vision and Teen Toys. Some videos portray the women as children, with pigtails, knee socks, frilly dresses or school uniforms, having sex with much older men. You can buy magazines like Teenagers, Young Stars, Finally Legal, Cherry Pop, Teeners from
Holland, Barely 18, Sweet 18, Just 18, and Innocence.”
It’s also possible to walk into an “adult” store and legally purchase BDSM videos including fantasy depictions of torture – or at least he could have done so yesterday afternoon here in the Western Suburbs of Sydney. I know I could have if I had $30 to spare.
They are marked with the price (so the Attorney General of New South Wales shouldn’t need to ask how much they cost – as he seemingly did in Parliament – reference the New South Wales Hansard ) and the name of the stores are clearly marked on the covers).
They are marked “X” but I doubt if they have ever been anywhere near the “OFLC” or the Attorney General’s Department – other than those
that I have sent or delivered to the OFLC or the Attorney General.
Their only response (so far) has been “it’s nothing to do with us – we’re the government”
Bob
.. and as an additional comment in 2004 the Director of the then OFLC directed his staff to return a very explicit (fantasy) video of explicit torture and rape marked GUFA (which is some sort of standards body in Europe indicating that neither he nor his staff were interested enough to investigate the issue.
He also refused my permission to import a more lighthearted (fantasy) BDSM film “No Mercy” which I purchased in Goulburn Street here in Sydney (falsely rated “X”) and which is F/M rather than M/F. I now have three copies including the DVD I was forbidden to import.
I purchased it legally (unclassified) in Park Street Sydney. It contains “extra material” not included in the possibly pirated copy.
To date this “violent” material hasn’t induced me to rape anyone.
I was more concerned about the “hidden camera” material which I note they are now legislating against in South Australia.
(forgive any formatting errors. typing into a funny little box is hard on the fingers and the eyesight.)
By Bob Bain on Mar 7, 2008
The “Monster Loose In Suburbia” comment was not mine, but the narrator’s. I agree that it’s the language of moral panic, not rigorous analysis. I did state that porn is having an increasing, and negative influence in young men’s peer cultures, and I stand by that.
Finally, you suggested research on children’s accidental exposure to porn – my research with Clive Hamilton did just that. Yes, the research is limited in various ways, but it still did document the extent of accidental and deliberate exposure at least among 16- and 17-year olds. Other, international research provides more detailed, corroborating evidence of this. See e.g. the following:
Mitchell, Kimberley J., David Finkelhor, and Janis Wolak. (2003). The Exposure of Youth to Unwanted Sexual Material on the Internet: A National Survey of Risk, Impact, and Prevention. Youth & Society, 34(3), March, pp. 330-358.
My published reports on the research are:
Flood, Michael. (2007). Exposure to Pornography Among Youth in Australia. Journal of Sociology, 43(1): 45-60.
Flood, Michael, and Clive Hamilton. (2003a). Youth and Pornography in Australia: Evidence on the extent of exposure and likely effects. Canberra: The Australia Institute, Discussion Paper No. 52, February.
Flood, Michael, and Clive Hamilton. (2003b). Regulating Youth Access to Pornography. Canberra: The Australia Institute, Discussion Paper No. 53, March.
Regards,
michael flood.
By Michael Flood on Mar 7, 2008
Michael, Thanks for clarifying it was not a direct quote. The fact Mark Bannerman preceded “There is effectively a monster loose in suburbia” with “Michael Flood has some bad news” lead me to believe it was a quote. I know I’m not the only one who thought this.
Another example of why the story was a shambles. I’ll update the blog post to make it clear it was the narrator’s creation.
By Mike on Mar 7, 2008