Thursday wrap up: Henson aftermath, NZ on filtering, ALP form letters
November 6, 2008 – 8:14 pm
John Hatzistergos
With so much of my time devoted to filtering, I haven’t had much of a chance to post about all the other stuff going on. Here’s a wrap up:
Art exhibitions: At a SCAG meeting today in Brisbane, NSW Attorney-General John Hatzistergos asked censorship ministers to ‘clarify and streamline the National Classification Scheme as it applies to artworks depicting children’ according to SMH.
“Recent events have indicated that the community could benefit from greater certainty and consistency in the application of the National Classification Scheme, particularly to art works,” Mr Hatzistergos said yesterday.
Filtering in New Zealand: Computer World NZ says the New Zealand government has ‘no current plan to follow Australia into compulsory filtering of internet connections by ISPs.’ ICT minister David Cunliffe told them that New Zealand’s response to undesirable online material emphasises education.
NZ is currently trialing voluntary blocking of known child abuse websites with some ISPs. Cunliffe said there are no plans for the programme to be expanded to other types of illegal material.
No plans now doesn’t mean no plans latter and naturally the nutter fringe wants it to go further and block legal hardcore pornography. The Society for Promotion of Community Standards Inc. said in a press release published November 13, 2007:
“Gay rights activists, paedophiles, homosexuals wanting to ‘hook up’ with underage school boys or view ‘bare-backing’ films, those addicted to hardcore pornography and all those who make a living from marketing such moral filth, have rubbished the Society’s suggestions for the implementation of such controls to prevent injury to the “public good”.”
Sounds like the same dirty tactics being used over here.
That same old ALP form letter: The ALP continues to send standard form letters to those demanding answers about their plans to censor the web. Simon Rumble writes:
Last week I wrote a letter to my local member, Anthony Albanese, detailing my concerns about the proposed internet censorship regime. I received a response last night. I won’t bother wasting electrons copying it in here, because I can just link to the letter Stilgerrian got because it’s exactly the fucking same.
View other MP letters and upload any you receive at the EFP Score Card wiki.
9 Responses to “Thursday wrap up: Henson aftermath, NZ on filtering, ALP form letters”
“Gay rights activists, paedophiles, homosexuals wanting to ‘hook up’ with underage school boys or view ‘bare-backing’ films”
“Bare-backing films”??
Surely if they’re down with the porn-community lingo, they watch it themselves.
These radical social conservatives are total fucking hypocrites. How often do you hear about them denouncing tv shows or ads for containing “inappropriate content” when it obviously takes a mind that’s already in the gutter to pick it out in the first place?
Maybe their moral crusading is a way of offsetting their own moral shortcomings.
By Fermista on Nov 6, 2008
Since statements like this:
“Gay rights activists, paedophiles, homosexuals wanting to ‘hook up’ with underage school boys or view ‘bare-backing’ films, those addicted to hardcore pornography and all those who make a living from marketing such moral filth, have rubbished the Society’s suggestions for the implementation of such controls to prevent injury to the “public good”.
make rational debate impossible we can point out that this is “exactly what they did in Nazi Germany” without falling victim to Godwins Law. I’m surprised they haven’t included Communists, Jews and N*****s in their grab bag of miscellaneous demons. The equation of Homsexual=Pedophile is particularly repugnant,and I say that as a heterosexual.
By Stevian on Nov 7, 2008
Stevian – I totally agree.
I also find it infuriating that these people are of the mentality that those that defend the rights of homosexuals must lean that way themselves.
“and I say that as a heterosexual”
It’s incredibly disappointing that clarifying statements like this are even necessary.
By Fermista on Nov 7, 2008
Got to say that I was offended by you censoring the word ‘N@zis’. Don’t set yourself up as an anti-censorship site, then censor comments. You are as bad as the Govt. BTW: does anyone realise that Yahoo!7 is already applying draconian censorship to their news blogs? No, didn’t think so. WE are FORKED! I can’t see us winning this one, vital as it is that we do.
By Max Tivey on Nov 7, 2008
Stevian: I’m not gay either, but don’t condemn those who are. Watch all the gay/lesbian sites get blocked by Fuc%head Conjob. It WILL happen. The internet is anarchic by nature, for fork’s sake keep it that way!!
By Max Tivey on Nov 7, 2008
@Max: There’s no censorship of Nazi or Nazis here. Any N*zi, N@zi or N*z* is typed by the user directly, not altered by the blogging system.
By Mike on Nov 7, 2008
Stevian’s comments don’t condemn homosexuals. I believe Stevian was simply adding emphasis to the fact that this isn’t am argument that heterosexuals or homosexuals see differently based on their sexuality.
By Mike on Nov 7, 2008
I’m pretty sure that by N*****s Stevian meant “Niggers” not “Nazis”.
Count the asterisks ;p
By Fermista on Nov 7, 2008
@Max: I self-censored a term referring to people of African descent.
Where did I condemn homosexuals, I said, I find the equation Homosexual=Pedophiles repugnant, which means I don’t like people being labeled as pedophiles simply because they are attracted to members of the same sex, it is a non-sequiter. I added that I was a heterosexual to forestall a response like:
“That’s exactly what a child molesting Fag would say”
By Stevian on Nov 7, 2008