Prev
Next

Google: An open web helps keep the bastards honest

Iarla Flynn

by Iarla Flynn

29 Mar 05:55am

Must Reads

The Punch is moving house - this is a caption

The Punch is moving house

385

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this? - this is a caption

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

122

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming” - this is a caption

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

251

Filed under: Censorship, Google, Internet, Isp Filter, Media, Tech

37 comments

If we were cavemen and we came across a sabre tooth tiger, what would we do? Let’s hope we’d run.

Quick: Google what to do if a sabre tooth tiger attacks

We’d know to run if we possessed important information - big cats have big teeth. Cavemen who didn’t have that information wouldn’t have run and wouldn’t have propagated. Information is fundamental to survival and well-being.

Today we live in an incredible era of information. A quarter of the world is online. This number is growing quickly and the amount of information we consume is ballooning. The openness of the Internet gives extraordinary access to information and this is a powerful force for good.

The Internet has helped level the playing field of commerce and education, enabled the sharing of ideas and opinions, and kept companies and institutions accountable. In Australian vernacular, it helps keep the bastards honest.

With the rise of the free Internet and the extraordinary information it brings also comes misinformation. And there is misinformation everywhere - not just online, but in newspapers, in classrooms, in books and on TV. Some things your parents and friends tell you turn out to be wrong, some things are right; and you need to learn to know the difference.  It’s a vital skill called critical thinking, which we all need to learn and teach our youth. People who are incapable of critical thinking may find themselves misinformed.

Wouldn’t you rather rely on your own resources and judgment than leave that job to others?

At Google, we value free expression. While we recognise that protecting the free exchange of ideas and information cannot be without some limits, we believe that more information generally means more choice, more freedom and ultimately more power for the individual.

A recent global survey from the BBC found that many people around the world (including 85% of Australians) believe that Internet access should be a fundamental right. It would be a travesty if this openness was lost. But every day around the world, more and more governments are restricting access to information online. The trend is alarming.

The mandatory ISP filtering proposal is a threat to the open Internet. It could block access to important online information, could confer legitimacy upon censorship by other Governments, and robs Australians of the opportunity to make some vital choices in their lives.

Esther Dyson has the answer:  The antidote for bad information is more information, not censorship.

Iarla Flynn is Head of Policy for Google Australia and NZ. Google outlines its deep concerns about the filter in this submission.

Most commented

37 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Pippaspost says:

      06:48am | 29/03/10

      I think this is a storm in a teacup, if parents feel the need to have filters to help monitor they highly vulnerable youngsters. Then I am for it, I don’t go to places I would ashamed for my family to see, be it in real life or on the web. So I wouldn’t even miss the fact that I couldn’t go to sex sites ect. Those that cry the loudest are usually the ones with the most to lose.

      Reply

    • Eric says:

      07:05am | 29/03/10

      The ones with the most to lose are those who believe in democracy and free speech.

      There is no way an Internet “filter” will be targeted only at porn sites. It will inevitably be used for political censorship. Leaked lists of banned sites already include a great deal of non-sexual material.

    • iansand says:

      07:28am | 29/03/10

      The problem is that we are not permitted to know what will be blocked, or why a site was blocked.  It may be more than sex sites.

    • Ben says:

      07:26am | 29/03/10

      @Pippaspost

      If you feel the need to filter your children’s internet access then by all means - do it! There are plenty of free/commercial filtering products available out there that are very easy to use. You can customise these as you see fit. If your children decide to circumvent these then I think you need to monitor what they are doing more closely.

      Now, Labor’s filter: It will NOT BLOCK PORN (so stop thinking it will). It is supposed to be aimed at mostly child porn except that is a load of nonsense - you don’t just go to http://www.freecp.com and start saving images to your desktop. CP is traded privately in peer to peer (not blocked by the filter), email (not blocked by the filter) or in private forums/chat rooms (not blocked by the filter). Labor’s filter will give parents a false sense of security. On the flip side there are a huge amount of “bad” things that it can do (technologically and ethically) which have been elaborated on over and over (and I’m sure will be repeated throughout this article) so do your own research there… I haven’t finished my coffee yet.

      For the record as a massive nerd in all my years of internet surfing I have never once “stumbled” upon CP.

    • dancan says:

      08:16am | 29/03/10

      The difference Pippa is that you have a choice if you wish to go to these places or not, with the filter there is no choice.  And as it was shown when the original list was leaked this filter isn’t just for child porn, there were a number of websites on there which simply contained information on various subjects (I wont list them all). 

      As iansand pointed out, we the Australian public, the people this filter is meant to protect aren’t even allowed to see what’s on the list, there is no policing of the list.  We don’t even know how websites get put onto the list in the first place other than the vague description of “content that is refused classification”.

      Another point I’d raise is that we have no idea what happens to people who attempt to reach this content.  I’m not talking about child porn, I’m talking about that website on euthanasia or something similar.  What happens to that person?  Are they placed on a list of dissidents to be watched by the police?  When I was studying philosophy at uni, we were asked to write a paper on euthanasia, would everyone in that class who looked up information in the internet be listed for investigation or have a black mark placed against out names?

      As for the “need to have filters to help monitor they highly vulnerable youngsters”.  There are already plenty of downloadable filters, there even plenty free internet filters available for parents if you just Google search.  Infact I just did a Google search “Free internet filter” 41,200,000 results. If every “concerned parent” spent as much time on the internet researching as they do complaining there wouldn’t be a need for this ridiculous firewall in the first place.

    • Patrick says:

      08:39am | 29/03/10

      Ben that’s a really damned good point that I just never thought of… 15 years of browsing the internet pretty much daily and I can also say I’ve never stumbled across any child pornography… It’s just not the sort of thing anyone links to, ever. I’d be more worried about what sites Conroy has in his history if his children are in danger from seeing child porn.

    • Paul says:

      10:24am | 29/03/10

      You really don’t seem to understand what this is all about.  The world doesn’t revolve around you and your children and your middle-class complacency.  This is not in any way about just the visibility or otherwise of sex sites.

    • Hades says:

      11:53am | 29/03/10

      @Pippaspost

      Don’t worry about it.  I attended a community book burning last night where all art books that had nudity in them were burnt. Although one lady tried to ruin the atmosphere with comments regarding free speech, I mentioned to our “leader” that she was casting spells to turn our children into free thinkers and the mob took care of her…...

    • Martin not convinved says:

      05:58pm | 29/03/10

      Pippaspost; If there was something in the news that was important to you that was filtered out of the news becuase the government of the day di not want it addressed or known to the public would you still hold the same view? Becuase this is exactly the thing and the foundation that is being set up under the internet filter. Child Pornography is just the labor party line to advert people away from thinking about the real reason behind the filter.

    • Bob H says:

      07:04am | 29/03/10

      Unfortunately our dear old political elite are not up to the modern ways yet and wish to centrally control information.  Its just not the old days anymore, free flowing info is the go and if Abbott decides not to have a filter my floating vote is his.

      Reply

    • Adam Diver says:

      07:43am | 29/03/10

      It would be interesting to see the liberals really attack this filter. What would the young voters do then?

      This is the worst policy to ever come out with absolutely no benefit as it won’t and more importantly can’t work. Despite the fact there is no benefit there are so many issues raised such as the speed of the internet, and the cost of implementation. Lets not forget the rediculous control of RC that is supposed to be “independant” but can not be viewed by the general public.

      Reply

    • Paul says:

      10:28am | 29/03/10

      It will be interesting to see what the Liberals did with this once in power.  I suspect it’ll be another Obama moment where change is preached but things not only don’t change, they become worse.

    • Dee says:

      07:54am | 29/03/10

      Oh these misguided parents! The proposed filter will not stop porn , more importantly it will not stop child porn - that is already illegal and blocked by your server already.Please if you want to speak out against the filter at least research your facts first. I am a mum and I wouldnt want my children to see such things either, I also don’t just believe what Iam feed by politicians, the internet is the modern day version of the biggest encyclopedia we have available - please don’t stand by and watch it burn.

      Reply

    • ea says:

      08:10am | 29/03/10

      And what about China?

      Reply

    • Bob H says:

      09:07am | 29/03/10

      Kev appears to be putting in place the necessary information blocks ready for easy transfer of Australia to Chinese rule.

    • Scot says:

      11:42am | 29/03/10

      ea, When Google business was given approval by the PRC they agreed to certain terms and conditions like any legal contract it was seen and agreed to by Googles council. It is the US company breaking the agreement not China. When was the last time China broke its agreements??? If Google does not want to abide by PRC law then they should leave. Their competitors will be very happy. Googles market share in China is small, compared to its competitors. Bit of course many in the west would not know this as they are ignorant of the facts.

    • Grumbles says:

      01:36pm | 29/03/10

      State owned companies hacked a number of google servers including gmail. Google should be appluaded for standing up to a totalitarian and communist regime, that the rest of the world seems to be falling over each other to worship. One of Google’s Chief executives has experienced that regime first hand. If a company owned by the Chinese Government hacks you then the chinese government has hacked you. If thats not a breach of agreement I don’t know what is.

    • Scot says:

      02:47pm | 29/03/10

      Grumbles. So you have proof that these two universities hacked Google. No proof has been given. I am sure most people in China do not care a great deal about this, if you can read Chinese and access these sites you may learn something. They have all the freedom as we have or had after Conroy and Rudd bring in the Internet police. 80% of internet traffic originates in the US. Do not interfere in other peoples internal affairs. Rudd and Conroy will be watching you all.

    • Grumbles says:

      05:41pm | 29/03/10

      Skot, it is the opposite that has happened, Google have removed their censorship in China, due to being oppressed by their government. It is bold to claim that Chinese do not care about their opression and censorship, but it might stem from the fact that if you dissent publically, you die.

    • Scot says:

      11:16pm | 30/03/10

      Grumbles, I made no such assertions.  Google agreed to specific terms when they took their business to China as any foreign or Chinese company must do in its business licence. Gooogle have since reneged on these contractual arrangements. Therefore, China as a sovereign country has every right to ask them to either correct this matter or leave, it was Googles decision. China is not in breach. It is very obvious you do not know Asia or China for that matter. if you did you would not be so be saying the things you have stated.  I would be more worried about what Rudd and Conroy are going to do to our internet access than what China or Singapore for that matter will do to protect its sovereign rights. So Google have spit the dummy, who cares. There are other companies in China that will fill the void.

    • Boy George says:

      09:34am | 29/03/10

      Political interference will prevent adverse sites. It happens when scientists dont publish their findings in an open way, and when politicians do the saem with data that distorts truth.
      We need an open internet due to findings already made public by the House of Lords in England. But were not hearing much of this are we.? That has been kept quiet by those who support labor party policy. We need to understand that the same problem would apply when the Liberals get in. Stop porn for underage kids by all means, but lets do it openly. China Censorship, Australia censorship? Maybe Mr Rudd has been too long in China. I hope not…Lets also ban porn in Canberra. Why is it there alone legally? You may take a guess….Politicians are openly saying one thing and doing another. We cant have the unwashed looking at gorgeous women beyond their reach can we….

      Reply

    • Mark Bishop says:

      09:37am | 29/03/10

      Politicians don’t like informed populaces because it means we no longer swallow their blatant lies, and this is mainly due to the information revolution the internet has brought about. You have your head in the sand if you believe the internet filter is about “protecting the children”, there are already many filters parents can install themselves. The true motive is to silence dissenting voices which are the only current obstacle in the way of the government doing whatever they please. Put more resources into stopping child porn, but don’t punish the rest of us and muzzle opinions you disagree with.

      Reply

    • John says:

      10:57am | 29/03/10

      Total true, this should be a bigger issue than it is. KRUDD has learnt from Howard on how to blind side the public.

    • Jason says:

      10:05am | 29/03/10

      Good article,  if the US is against it and google and its obvious a filter won’t stop child porn why ahve one?

      Reply

    • kiera says:

      10:08am | 29/03/10

      Ben, thats one of the best explanations Ive read online about the proposed filter. A friend of mine in the industry says pretty much the same thing.

      Its going to impact on all aspects of the internet for example… visual artists : what happens to art history? Every period in art depicts nudity and or social comment. The government has already started censoring artists at an alarming rate. So does that mean we cant access works from those such as Michelangelo and Ingres through to Tracey Emin and Joel Peter Whitkin, not to mention some very fine Australian artists. Research and history benifits provided by the internet will be surely impacted. I pity the student studying if the proposed filter goes ahead.

      Reply

    • Paul says:

      10:15am | 29/03/10

      Google should talk.  They are pretty adept at filtering search results when it suits them.

      Reply

    • Kerusty says:

      10:40am | 29/03/10

      China wants us to have the filter, like a good little dog.  It’s that simple.

    • John says:

      10:40am | 29/03/10

      This policy should send shivers up every Labor voters spine. Free speech is the most important corner stone of a democratic society. I smell very big censorship rat, this is a nasty policy from a government who are more interested controlling debate than open discussion. If this get through Australia will be the poorer for it and join the likes of China and Iran. Shame Labor Shame!

      Reply

    • Scot says:

      02:55pm | 29/03/10

      John, If you get on the Chinese websites and read the freedom of speech that people have you would be very surprised how free the system is. Yes there are some tat try to bend the rules. There are more internet users in China than the US? The quality of the internet in Chins is years ahead of Australia.

    • marley says:

      07:23pm | 29/03/10

      Scot - I rather suspect your name isn’t Scot but that’s by the by.  So what you’re saying, is, if I live in Shanghai or Beijing or Lhasa, I can read the Dalai Lama’s latest thoughts and keep abreast of local politics in Taiwan?  I can access websites that oppose the Party and push for Uighur autonomy?

      I don’t think so.

    • Scot says:

      11:28pm | 30/03/10

      Marley, May I suggest you should buy a ticket and go to China and Tibet and see for yourself. And when you are in China try out the internet for you self and see how silly many of these comments are. And talk to the highly educated younger generation and see what they have to say. You would be amazed about what they read and hear about what is going on in and out of China. China educates some 2.5 Million University graduates every year. Like any country, if you live by the rules no one has anything to worry about. I am more concerned about my well being walking down the streets and using public transport in Sydney than doing the same in China, HK or Singapore. The legal system in Australia has been dumbed down it is scary.

    • thomas vesely says:

      05:45pm | 29/03/10

      this is about sweeping governmental errors under the carpet.this is about blocking informed debate.this is about the christian right not liking the paedophilia revelations.this is about open/transparent governance.this is not about children porn.

      Reply

    • Dave says:

      10:22pm | 29/03/10

      Didn’t the previous government start distributing a internet filtering program/s that allowed people to ‘opt in’ to protect their children. The government is planning on introducing a secret blacklist, with absolutely no transparency, and very little information on how websites get put on the list, or heaven forbid, get removed from it.

      Why is our government trying to prevent people from doing things on the internet that are perfectly legal to do in real life. You can walk into any casino in the country, and throw away your life savings to your heart’s content, but they want/ed to put a ban on online gambling / gaming. You can walk into any number of sex shops around the country and purchase reasonably hardcore pornography, and yet they want to legislate against online pornography.

      If they want to stop child pornography, then that’s fantastic, have at it. Spend your time policing something that is actually illegal, and completely disgusting. This is the same with the R-rating debate, we should not be legislating against adults doing adult things because out of some desire to have a controlling nanny state, we feel we need to protect our kids.

      The whole Rudd government approach is quite dictatorial, and opposite to what I had hoped for, after Howard’s arrogance, and nose-thumbing approach to policy.  We do not need another bureaucracy trying to police the internet, and taking the usual hamfisted, knee-jerk approach to running roughshod over the rights, and freedom of personal choice of the Australian public.

      Reply

    • Ellie says:

      12:54am | 30/03/10

      So if this is about stopping child porn (which obviously is total BS) then why is Exit International on the banned list? Why? Has Conroy stated why? That sure is not child porn and it’s not the government’s godamn business if I want to look at Philip Nitchke’s site. I’m 30 and have no terminal diseases, and so so angry this filter is occuring, fullstop.

      Reply

    • BTS says:

      12:52pm | 30/03/10

      Probably because assisting others to commit suicide is a crime.

    • Steve says:

      03:58am | 30/03/10

      No amount of legislation can stop stupid people from doing stupid things. Federal Labor is on a real loser with this policy, unfortunately the other mob have their own social agenda which fits nicely with internet censorship.

      Reply

    • Joe says:

      02:30pm | 30/03/10

      Labor = Communism = complete control of all aspects of your life.
      Liberal under John Howard was exactly the same under a different flag, that’s why he was booted out. Has anybody else noticed the similarties between Howard and Rudd. Would Abbott be any different if he got in?
      The answer is to get involved, vote for someone you know, who will represent you and not the party before 1984 becomes our reality.

      Reply
 
Sorry, comments are now closed for this article.

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Malcolm Farr

farrm51 21 May 13 09:12PM

@nigelmcbain I don't see the nexus between gay marriage and gay sex education in schools. ACL does. Health issues should be taught whatever

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 21 May 13 08:34PM

@jennijenni a few companies are known to do that - ask for story ideas from job applicants so they can steal them later

Malcolm Farr

farrm51 21 May 13 08:23PM

: Bruce Springsteen: "I get roughed up crowdsurfing… people try to pull chunks out of me" http://t.co/jiHqt8agt9” it was him, @patricklion

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 21 May 13 07:36PM

Ray Hadley fires back at Carlton. Great @candacesutton1 get: http://t.co/7fQzk4Xixh

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

by The Punch Team

385

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

by Hannah Harborow

122

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

by Sarrah Le Marquand

251

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter