The federal government made its position on an R18+ rating for video games quite clear last year in the lead up to the December 10 SCAG meeting. But David Ramli at ARN managed to get Communications Minister Stephen Conroy to personally endorse the rating, although his reasons for supporting it leave a bittersweet taste in the mouth.
“I’ve always argued we should try and have across platforms one system, ie it should be platform neutral,” he said. “That’s why the argument around Internet filtering becomes particularly ferocious because I argue it’s just another platform, it’s not mystical.”
So where Minister for home affairs Brendan O’Connor wants to “provide better guidance for parents and remove unsuitable material from children and teenagers,” Conroy believes that an adult classification for video games is appropriate because all types of media – including the internet – should be classified exactly the same.
Of course, Conroy’s endorsement doesn’t actually help the process of overhauling the classifications system happen any faster. Chances are we’ll be waiting until at least the end of this year, if not next year to see where the classifications review takes us.
[ARN]
matt
Friday, February 4, 2011 at 11:38 AMhis quote is perfectly sensible and correct.
its only fair.
the problem is, the filter won’t work and its still hazy who is controlling what is blocked…
there is also the argument that mandatory censorship in general is shit.
but at least it will be equally shit across all platforms of media…
he is right: the internet is not some magical place that can’t be touched.
however it is a place where your classic idea of ‘general media’ and people simply coming together to have a conversation, meet.
it is more than a medium. it isn’t film, or television. it is speech.
the idea of ‘censoring the internet’ is the same as an idea to monitor every word that comes out of everyone’s mouth all the time, simply so that no actors can say naughty things on TV or Film. like having a policeman follow everyone around, into their homes, into their private conversations. every bit of speech.
the internet is not a medium in the traditional sense when you think of censorship. it is a parallel world in which different mediums exist. by all means censor those mediums, but stop suggesting you are going to censor the whole internet.
I think it comes from the idea that everything on the internet is public, because everyone can access everything… I don’t know though… for instance, a kid going onto the shady areas of 4chan could be considered the same as him going over to the potty mouthed kid at school’s house. that kid is allowed to swear as much as he likes in his house, in front of the other kid. there isn’t going to be some cop at the door going “you can’t go in their kid, this family home has been rated ‘MA15+ contains course language’”
DansDans
Friday, February 4, 2011 at 2:00 PMIt’s COARSE language…
And the worst thing is I’ve actually seen it written as “course language” on DVD and VHS covers…
RobbyM
Friday, February 4, 2011 at 11:56 AMKnowing Conroy – He’ll no doubt agree to the new classification system and then push to have every game rated MA15+ banned because of the “denied classification” content in the games.
Conroy can’t and won’t ever go against the wishes of his Australian Christian Lobby overlords.
Josh
Friday, February 4, 2011 at 5:35 PMThe thing is, what Conroy is trying to do is actually very noble, and while he is going about it the completely wrong way and his attitude to thinking that it will work and such is incredibly stupid, the core thing he is trying to do is good.
Daniel Weaver-Koenigs
Saturday, February 5, 2011 at 11:01 AMPlenty of evil things have been done with good intentions. I don’t feel he is noble or feel sorry for him being misguided.
Namarrgon
Saturday, February 5, 2011 at 3:36 PMThe intention to protect children is essentially noble, though hardly uncommon.
The means that he is choosing to impose his ideas of protection, and the various forms of “protection” his ideas entail, is what we take issue with.
He’s very quick to play the Kiddy Porn card, and is quick to follow on with Refused Classification = Illegal, but he’s already mentioned adding sites containing R-rated porn (legal), gambling (legal in many cases), euthanasia (legal) – the “undersirables” list continues, and that’s only what’s crossed his mind so far. Plus there’s the mistakes that somehow wind up on the (secret) list, like that Gold Coast dentist.
And then there’s the whole workability question. Sure, a block list with 1000 entries can keep us from accidentally stumbling over a few nasty pages (though I can’t say it’s ever happened to me), but it’s certainly not going to keep it away from anyone who actually wants to see it. It’s far too easy to just move such content to a different URL, or distribute it via FTP or BitTorrent or any number of other methods. Heck, even appending a single question mark on the URL trivially bypasses the filter as it stands (and anything more comprehensive would both drastically impact the speed, and still not block more than a fraction).
TL;DR: It’s ineffective, open to abuse, and a big waste of taxpayer dollars that could be spent on real enforcement or education.