It’s pretty clear what we think of the Government’s proposed (and now delayed) mandatory internet filter. But the question is whether or not it’s big enough an issue to change your vote.
A heap of technology media outlets are running a unified poll to try and gauge just how big an impact this policy will have on how people will vote at the upcoming election. Although the poll doesn’t address the complexities involved with the political process, it’s still a good indication of just how important an issue it is.
Take the time to add your voice to the poll below. If nothing else, with a big enough response it might help show the political parties just how unpopular their policy is.
Bruce Cooper
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 1:36 PMI have been a labor voter my entire adult life, but I have joined the greens party over this issue. Not only have I changed my vote, I’m actively getting involved in getting the greens more representation. I think the greens will pick up a big increase in popularity in the coming election
j
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 3:43 PMYou do realise, a vote for Greens is a vote for Labor.
So why the hell are you voting for Greens if you don’t want Labor to be in power?
Or have I completely misunderstood the reasons for Labor supporters abandoning Labor…
James Carson
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 4:28 PMif u dont like the internet filter, but do like most of labor’s other policies, you vote greens, because while they are progressive, they dont like any plans that reduce our freedom as people. (ie. the greens will cross the floor to vote with the liberals to stop the filter from going through)
El Presidente
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 8:01 PM@j
I don’t know why so many people believe this, but it isn’t the case. The Greens have typically given preferences to Labor but this is not the same thing.
Personally, I’ll be voting below the line and selecting my own preferences. I’d recommend this to anyone who is concerned about where their preferences will go if they simply vote “1″ above the line.
I voted Labor in ’07, and have otherwise been happy with much of their work, but this obsession with censorship is a total deal breaker for me. If the Victoria election is anything to go by (where Greens got 20% of the vote, an amazing result for them) I’m not the only one who is looking to the Greens for progressive politics rather than the rabid conservatism being peddled by the two major parties people think they have to choose between. I’m sick of it and I’m prepared to say so with my vote.
Remember – your vote is as valuable as Julia Gillard’s, Tony Abbot’s or anyone else’s.
Glen Coffey
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 11:59 PMThats not entirely true. Greens cast their preferences to labor or have done in the past, but that doesn’t mean your preferences have to go to labor. You can choose for them to go wherever you please. Most people are lazy and put the 1 in the box above the line in which case yes their prefs would go labor, otherwise you can number all the boxes and choose exactly where your vote goes.
Does that make sense to everyone?
Harry
Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 1:19 AMI might also add that in addition to being able to choose your own preferences, voting for Green as number 1 will allocate funds to the party.
Also, the major parties do care about where the first preferences go. If there is a big enough shift, they can see that the electorate clearly has problems with their current policies.
Let’s stop supporting the status quo and get some real action.
GavinFace
Thursday, July 15, 2010 at 11:02 AMJ is CORRECT. People here claiming otherwise need to do some RESEARCH.
If you don’t fill in preferences, Greens will direct them to labor.
If you DO fill in all the preferences, THEY STILL eventually flow DOWN THE CHAIN until it reaches… you guessed it, either Labor or Liberal!! The vote ends up going to one of the two major parties. YES you can choose which one. But who are you going to give it to, crazy ultra-conservative christian liberal Tony Abbott? :S I don’t think so. There is no ‘vote for greens’ without the preference going to one of the major parties. That is the cold hard truth.
gooomelb
Saturday, August 21, 2010 at 5:28 PMThats not quite true. if you vote for the greens in the senate and they do not get power you full vote goes to your second preference. The greens actually use this handy piece of info to encourage you to vote greens saying “no vote is wasted when you vote Greens”….
Alfred
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 4:38 PMDo you know who the Greens are giving their preference votes to?
Mitchell Ablett-Nelson
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 5:38 PMit doesnt matter that the greens give preference to labor becuase if enough of the greens get in to have a say they can vote against it…. ie. if labour does not have a majority in parliament but do with support of the greens the greens can still vote however they like, they are still a seperate party.
Chris McMahon
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 11:05 PMIt doesn’t matter who the Greens give preferences to – manually fill out your entire ballot and give your preference to whoever you want.
I never use those “how to vote” cards they hand out. It’s my vote and I’ll say who gets my preferences.
Because of Labour’s filter, lack of R18 gaming, demand to search my laptop at border control and their wish to spy on everything I do online, I’m putting every Labour candidate last.
I’m sick of politicians labelling anyone who doesn’t want to live in a police state, and who wants privacy, a child molester or pervert.
Dan C
Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 9:50 PMHere here. That’s a really great thing to hear, and the replies to this comment are just as heartening. I’m glad at least some people out there understand the way the system works… flawed as it is.
As James Carson noted, the Greens are somewhat of a guiding voice as far as reasonable legislation that respects civil liberties goes. It would be nice to have a few more dissenting voices in the Senate to add their own two cents to the debate, and some may not agree with the more progressive of the Green party’s policies, but as it stands to pass any sort of legislation the government (with the current make up of the Senate anyway) needs the support of the Greens and the independents.
This prompts more active and lively debate on the floor, and consequently in the public sphere, because the minor players are in a position to demand that dialogue before they commit to passing a bill, and sad as it is, that’s the closest we’re gonna get to real democratic discussion in such a staid two party preferred system.
It’s a safeguard that ensures that legislation isn’t passed by a government with little to no consultation outside of the party room (as Work Choices laws were when Howard was still at the helm… he held a majority in both houses at the time, hence really didn’t need to debate legislation before passing it without question… and look how well that worked out. The Liberals are still trying to live down that mess.)
Bobby Kaye
Wednesday, August 4, 2010 at 10:44 AMAustralians are going to vote in 2 weeks. Who should they vote for? Lot’s has changed over the years. Please watch this video before you choose.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kh3Kb2cgZgc
Bobby Kaye
Wednesday, August 4, 2010 at 10:45 AMAustralians are going to vote in 2 weeks. Who should they vote for? Lot’s has changed over the years. Please watch this video before you choose.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kh3Kb2cgZgc
Anthony Mcintosh
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 1:42 PMSo at the time of writing, 5,929 people (no voters) will be voting for the Greens
Blake
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 1:51 PMI’ll be voting primarily for the Australian Sex Party.
Greens are my backup plan.
Samwise
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 10:01 PMMe too!
Clearly great minds think alike!
Kieran Lee
Wednesday, July 21, 2010 at 3:00 PMDitto
NickT
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 2:18 PMWell, I hope that’s the case, and people are reading the question rather than just clicking no for the hell of it, or assuming it’s another ‘do you want the filter’ question.
It’s a big enough issue for me to not vote for Labour, regardless of any other policy
Adam
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 2:02 PMYes 5% (323 votes)
No 93% (6,283 votes)
Don’t care 2% (130 votes)
How does anyone that reads this site vote “Don’t Care”???
Pity ~6k people can’t throw an election..
Nick Broughall
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 2:20 PMThe same poll’s actually being run across a number of sites, including SMH, News and others. I don’t think those “don’t care” votes come from us :)
Adam
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 2:35 PMThanks Nick, i didn’t realise.
matt
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 3:22 PMwow really? those sites are pretty mainstream.
clearly every day casual internet users really don’t like the idea.
dontblockmyporn
Monday, July 19, 2010 at 8:24 PMGlobal warming, wars to protect oil supply that kill innocent civilians and aussie soldiers, one of the highest youth suicide rates in the world, mass extinction of plants and animals, access to services and infant mortality rate/life expectancy depending on where you are born in this land, mental illness and the depression skyrocketing,…damn it all I say…give me my porn.
…
I don’t care!
seriously, close down Farmville and take a look at the real world.
Stephen Earp
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 2:02 PMhell of a choice – vote in the mandatory filter but keep the NBN with Labor, or vote for the demise of the NBN but keep free internet with Libs.
This has to be the most tech-oriented election in Australian history, with the highest level of pressure applied to governments over technological issues now more than ever.
Doesn’t matter how much of an optimist you are, this seems to be a lose lose election for tech enthusiasts and geeks.
Flux
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 2:31 PMSeriously, where do you get the idea that Abbott and the Libs will not be implementing a net filter? This sort of pandering to the religious right of the Australian Christian Lobby is EXACTLY what you’ll be getting from the Liberal party if they’re elected. Abbott has had plenty of chances to come out in opposition to it, and he has never done so – I take this silence as tacit consent to the whole notion.
Until the Libs make a statement that they will not be filtering, and that statement is a formal document (so Abbott can’t later claim he was just saying it to win an argument at the time), you have to consider a vote for the Libs to be a vote for censorship. If this issue is important to you, vote Greens or one of the minor parties.
RB
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 2:50 PM“hell of a choice – vote in the mandatory filter but keep the NBN with Labor, or vote for the demise of the NBN AND end up with a filter anyway.”
- Fixed it for you ;)
As much as I despise Conroy and the Labor Party’s policies in general, Abbot’s only indications on the 2 subjects confirms that only the NBN will be scrapped…
As sick as it makes me feel saying this, could it be a case of “better the devil we know than the one we don’t?”
NotoriousR
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 3:56 PMYeah, I agree. This just sucks though. Can’t we just declare Conroy’s house an independent nation, so we don’t have to deal with him anymore, and he can make all the stupid policies and filters he wants?
Shane
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 2:12 PMPrimarily, I will be trying my best to see to it the Conroy does not see other term. Secondarily, I will be moving my vote towards those parties that support freedom of speech in this country, including a commitment to oppose an internet filter, but also reform to our ratings systems, specifically towards the inclusion of games into the R ratings (as well as fixing the system).
The greens may ride higher on environmental issues as well, as both labor and the libs are fence sitting saps on the subject.
N@
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 2:16 PMBetween a rock and a hard place… NBN on one side, censorship on the other. I am voting green, but will preference Labor before the libs.
Vernon 'Jatsim'
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 3:12 PMVote Greens !!! = Same Labor policies, but no Filter, Easy we lose nothing…
Samwise
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 10:05 PMThe Greens don’t have a unanimous policy on this! The party is currently divided. When the by-election in Bradford was held, the Greens candidate spoke out copiously about how he supported the filter. So yeah, don’t go banking on them to save our interwebs. Best bet at this stage is the Sex Party and/or the Democrats.
Richard
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 3:19 PMSex Party, Pirate Party and Greens will get my votes before either Labor or Liberal. Oh and I will be voting below the line in the senate too.
Zac F.
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 3:25 PMLabour seems to be the lessor of two evils here, but I’m voting for greens. I agree with them on alot of subjects including the protection of the environment. If we kill our environment our planet will slowly die too, unless we find some way to keep O2 levels up. Greenhouse gasses won’t matter when nuclear fusion is developed. This internet filter is just another reason to vote for them.
Peter Keelback
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 3:28 PMGood heavens! Don’t vote Libs. Tony Abbott is an extreme right Roman Catholic. If Lab doesn’t do it, he will introduce his own filter. Any filter of his will be far stricter than a Labour filter. So vote Green! Plus we don’t want the NBN stopped. We need that.
Keelback.
James-Mac
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 3:50 PM“Roman Catholic”
Dude, so am I… we’re not all Calvinists.
James Carson
Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 12:19 PMrephrase time: tony abbott uses the exuse that he is a roman catholic to excuse his rabid conservative policies. he also guarantees him self at least 30% of the grey vote by claiming that its all done in the interest of christianity.
Charles
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 3:33 PMI’ll still be voting Labor even with this policy. There are too many other important things Labor is doing to risk the Liberals getting into power again, and the Greens aren’t prepared to take the basic political necessity of compromise to make it worthwhile voting for them (and there policies are too narrowly based anyway).
James-Mac
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 3:48 PMWhat was up with Q&A last night?
Half a show about refugees, 1 question about the filter (and even that was about a tenous link between porn and sexual abuse), and then the rest of the show about carbon trading and a bloody octopus.
John
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 3:58 PMHEY. Don’t take it out on the octopus.
Luke Turner
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 5:09 PMi dunno personally, really it screams a catch-22 situation, dammed if you do, dammed if you don’t.
really the main cutting point here is the upper house seats. Ultimately i’ll be looking at the general direction of the Greens, as scary as it sounds, they seem to be the ones who’ve actually put some thought into the internet filter.
honestly however, the mere fact a mandatory filter is being discussed sets a dangerous precedent that genuinely “doesn’t do what it says on the box”.
The real sad part is, (and i’m sure it’s been covered to oblivion already) That what the filter’s been set out to do can be more efficiently done with better policing and education. A far better use of money if you ask me.
sadly if anything, i’d rather vote for a filter to be opt-in, than not have any choice at all..
I personally think that’s what it all boils down to right there. Choice.
Glenn Mitchell
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 6:17 PMthis is a stupid question and a stupid set of options.
It’s like saying “do you want to stub your toe?” without mentioning that the other option is being shot in the head.
If we could vote for parties on a per policy basis, then no, I wouldn’t vote for that particular one. But to think that internet filtering (whilst important) should eclipse all other policies … ridiculous!
Nick Broughall
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 8:51 PMBut the thing is that it is an issue for a large number of voters, regardless of other policies.
David Anderton
Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 3:08 AMSemi-agree…
For me Environment,Health and refugees are bigger issues for me but if there is a choice between two parties that have the same policies for those issues but differ on the filter, it would be the deciding factor.
Robert Rogers
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 7:37 PMI’m voting Greens no.1 now :)
Ben
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 8:54 PMWell the thing with the liberals is that it seems as if Abbot is in support of filtering out CP and MAY be pro filtering, many high ranking Liberals have states that they are against the filter (http://www.itnews.com.au/News/219382,opposition-mounts-for-gillards-filter-push.aspx). I’m hoping that the Liberals use their common sense and see that not supporting the filter = votes.
Samwise
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 10:00 PMI used to vote Liberal, then I voted Greens, but since the Greens are officially divided on the issue of Internet Censorship (each electorate representative at this stage has their own views, but there is not a party wide policy yet), I am now voting for the Australian Sex Party. Not only are they against the internet filter, but they want to revise the classification system entirely, allow for a better sex education system in schools and provide parents and carers with internet education so that there’s less cyber-bullying and less need for filters of any sort.
And I like sex…so, you know. It makes sense.
Rob
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 10:19 PMIt’s worth looking a bit deeper into the Greens’ history on this issue. In 2009 in the by-election in the electorate of Higgins, their candidate was Dr. Clive Hamilton, a man widely perceived to be the architect or mastermind of mandatory ISP-level internet filtering in Australia, dating back to white papers he wrote in support of the practice for a think tank called The Australia Institute. While the Greens have stated that they are against the filter, and stepped up their rhetoric on the issue since Hamilton’s defeat in Higgins, they have not unequivocally stated that they will not run Hamilton as a candidate in the future.
As such, for the Greens to sell themselves as the ‘anti-filter’ party is not unlike someone starting a pro-refugee party and inviting Pauline Hanson to be a candidate.
The good news is that there is one party that has been steadfast in speaking out against the filter, and credits internet censorship as perhaps the most important issue that caused the founders to bring the party into existence in the first place. Find out more at:
http://www.sexparty.org.au/index.php/policies
Tim
Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 10:51 PMI don’t really support the government on this issue at all, but while the opposition talks about dismantling the NBN, there’s no way I will support the Liberals.
The NBN is the future of our country, I believe as important as electricity and phone, and any attempt to stop it is ridiculous.
I may vote greens, but for me it’s more important that Labor, and the NBN be allowed to continue.
I’m still hoping that Labor will see sense and abandon the stupid Filter policy.
Fred
Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 12:27 AMI’m not about to let some reality-detached wowser zealot like Conroy tell me what I can and can’t access via the internet. I don’t access bad stuff because I’m not interested in it, but that’s not the point. Australia is (still) a free society but Conroy thinks that following the example of China and Iran is a great idea.
Gillard thinks that Conroy’s on the right track – ’nuff said. I’ll be voting Greens this time around too.
David Anderton
Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 3:06 AMVote green and then choose my preferences.
R
Wednesday, July 14, 2010 at 12:55 PMYes 4% (570 votes)
No 94% (13,841 votes)
Don’t care 2% (280 votes)
Voting Green or Sex party and choosing your own preference seems to be the only option. Has anyone set up a facebook group so we can organise a swing in the vote (gotta do it now before the government filters out facebook)
Drew
Tuesday, July 27, 2010 at 11:19 PMFor all of you who are against the proposed internet filter I would suggest when it come time to vote that you take the time and vote below the line putting Communications Minister Stephen Conroy last. No Conroy no filter.
Andrew
Tuesday, August 17, 2010 at 8:29 PMgood idea!
Andrew
Tuesday, August 17, 2010 at 8:28 PMif you want to know where your senate votes go
i found this really good website
https://www.belowtheline.org.au/
second time voting and i’m going to fill out all the boxes.
neither of the 2 major parties bear enough relevance to me.
and while some of the parties above the line preferences are close to what i want..
there’s a few i’d like to change
Greens and Sex party at the top for me and now i’m working out the rest.
Secular party looks good too.
Shooters, climate sceptics, family first, Citizens Electoral Council, anything with Christian in the title can all go last along with the major parties