With apologies to Obi-Wan Kenobi for the title…
Public awareness and momentum against the issue of the Federal Government’s proposed clean feed appears to be growing apace. Now we have the international news magazine, TIME, reporting on it in none too glowing terms:
Initially, the minister for communications, Stephen Conroy, denied that the list on Wikileaks and the ACMA blacklist are the same, a denial that rang a little hollow when one of its partners, the Internet Industry Association (IIA), publicly condemned the release and posting of the list. “No reasonable person could countenance the publication of links which promote access to child abuse images, irrespective of their motivation, which in this case appears to be political,” said IIA chief executive Peter Coroneos.
Against all the best advice, the government perpetuates the move to, at the very least, waste taxpayer dollars on proving the unworkableness of the clean feed.
It would be much smarter if the government simply admitted this wasn’t going to work in the way it’s being couched and returned to their previous, workable policy, of an opt-in filtered feed that could be requested by consumers should they wish it. Doing this would, in all likelihood, satisfy both sides of the argument – those whose view of the world has them worried about their kids seeing untoward material on the ‘net (soon they’ll realise how rare this actually is) and those of us who believe a mandatory, opt-out clean feed is an issue that threatens civil liberties in this country.
My friend and colleague, Laurel Papworth also shares her views on the Time piece.