Giz is no fan of the current government’s mandatory filtering proposal, but the history of Australian government net filtering is rife with wasted money and wasted opportunities. Realistically, though, what should any government be doing?
Also: Should You Act On ACTA? What Australians Need To Know
The thought was spiked in my head yesterday reading an ITNews piece that reported that Tony Abbot had formed a “Cybersafety” panel, headed up by former Optus executive (and current Liberal MP) Paul Fletcher. The Coalition panel is tasked with investigating the roles of the ACMA, AFP, ISPs and (essentially) anyone with a stake in online safety.
It appears that it’s heavily looking back to the Howard Government’s Netalert plans, and while I do think there’s something laudable in having an optional (rather than mandatory) filter, the statistics for Netalert were, in final analysis, rather embarrassing; despite a $15 million advertising spend promoting the scheme, by the time the current government wound it up, something like 1 per cent of Australian parents were actually using a Netalert provided filter. Meanwhile, the current government has spent god knows how much money on a mandatory filtering proposal that is still part of policy, even if timetables for its implementation have slipped, slid and skidded all over the information superhighway.*
Or, in other words, no matter what side of politics you happen to sit on, a lot of time and money’s been spent on net filtering with not much in the way of solid results.
This seems to me to be an excellent discussion point; what’s the best possible approach? Mandatory filtering is a daft idea — too easily circumvented, expensive to keep track of — but should governments be involved in filtering of other kinds, and if so, how?
Clearly if the opposition’s making statements about internet filtering, it’s being seen as an electable issue (again), but what’s the best approach? Australian parents seem remarkably reluctant to take up self-downloaded filters, but is that a bad thing? Should IT vendors be giving them away with every laptop? Is it all a moot issue with the rise of tablets and smartphones?
*As per classical rules of internet journalism, I’m obliged to use the phrase “information superhighway” once a decade in articles. Just thought I’d get it out of the way here.
Antonia
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 10:26 AMPeople should take responsibility for their actions. If they don’t have any security software/procedures installed then they shouldn’t complain if they get a virus. And parents should take responsibility for the content their kids view on the equipment they provided them. Don’t expect the government to hold your hand when you “cross a road”.
Rossco
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 10:26 AMParents should start being parents again. The internet is not a babysitting service.
Barry
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 10:32 AMThe mandatory filtering that the current government is trying to get through is (in my opinion) the stupidest idea going. The list will no doubt have flase positives and if your company is on it, you can basically sue the government for loss of business. The Howard government had the better idea when compared with the current. It gave the parents the power to filter and so they should.
If a filter type policy was to be introduced, it should put pressure back on to the parents and try to make them be parents again. Download tools like K9, which is free filter tool and does a great job too.
Sicarius123
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 7:01 PMChuck em back in front of the TV like the baby boomers did? :p
MDolley
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 10:37 AMGive more money to the AFP to track and shut down child porn sites. Allow them to generate an Opt-In list for ISP level filtering.
I don’t have a problem with my ISP blocking known child porn sites. I don’t look at them and I don’t want anybody to look at them. The problem with the mandatory filter is that it’s scope was too broad.
Secondly, educate parents about the actions they can take to protect their children online.
Roland
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 10:40 AMShould have just kept it at “but the history of Australian government is rife with wasted money and wasted opportunities”.
TheBlack
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 10:44 AMNetAlert was a raging success, what are you talking about?
NetAlert showed the Government exactly what the PEOPLE of Australia wanted…
No bloody filter.
Actions to the contrary are treasonous against the peoples desires.
alphamone
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 1:42 PMthe question is, was it worth the development and maintenance costs. If the majority of partents that use filtering software for their kids’ internet access are using commercial (or even just other free products), it is a waste of taxpayers money to support something that is not getting much use, especialy if there are better, free, options out there.
Rollz
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 10:58 AMIt’s hard to come up with solutions to this one. Government wants to keep us “safe” but in the end it gravitates towards censorship.
I have little ones and I want filtering. I use K9 but nothing does the job to the standard I want. I cannot sit there for the hour or two each kid wants to play.
If the government wants to filter, pay someone the millions to develop a world class filter that works. Easy to turn off/on, works on all browsers and can filter Youtube. I would buy.
I don’t need protection, my kids need it.
Barry
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 11:41 AMTo Rollz. Firstly, sorry for the following comment as I know it will no doubt hurt but….
You said – “I don’t need protection, my kids need it.” You are wrong. You saying this means that you don’t really want to protect your children, you don’t want to teach them not to put a fork into a power socket or protect them from bullies at school. They are YOUR children, YOU should be taking responsibility for your children and that means protecting them from not just one thing but all things. Take the time to do just that on the Internet. Be a true parent again.
Again, sorry but I have children myself and I take the time to protect them and this includes spending time going through logs on the computer to see where they are been, blocking sites that are bad after I’ve viewed them. It’s not a hard thing to do and they are my children…I don’t want any government telling them what they cannot and can see on the internet. That’s my job as a PARENT
Blake
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 11:59 AMIt’s not a solvable problem (especially sites like YouTube).
Even Google struggle with identifying a lot of images let alone the content of video.
For a YouTube filter to work you’d need to download the file, analyze its contents better than Google, and hope you got it right, never gonna happen.
If you can’t be sure your kids are being safe, don’t let them use something unsafe. You wouldn’t let them play with knives, don’t let them play on the internet without your permission.
Hell maybe set something up with a whitelist of sites they are allowed to go to, and whenever they want to go elsewhere you have to specifically allow it. I’m sure there would be programs to let you do that?
After that change the default search engine to something kid friendly, my first google result came up with KidRex, seems like a decent option http://www.kidrex.org/parents/about.html
It’s your job as a parent to teach your kids how to be safe, if you don’t think they should be using the internet without you, don’t let them.
Alex
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 1:35 PMActually, that’s not what Rollz said.
He said kids need protection, asked for a little help because own efforts to date haven’t been to the standard he would like. He even said he’d be happy to pay for the right product.
He also said he wants it for his kids and not himself, which by extension implies he doesn’t believe that a blanket filter applied to the entire population is the right solution since that would also apply to himself.
I have no problem with taxpayer funded, government provided assistance for parents that ask for help… that’s the point of a government; to serve the people that elected them.
Barry
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 2:10 PMHe also said “I cannot sit there for the hour or two each kid wants to play.”. If he wants better protection then he has to sit there for an hour or two (or however long) to help provide better protection for his children. This is what I do and I do other things like have them play on the PC in the lounge room and not behind a locked door, this way I can look over and see what they are doing.
OpenDNS is another great method to use for blocking sites as well and should be looked into as this can provide another level of security for parents but one of the things I don’t like is parents screaming won’t someone think of the children when they (the parents) should be doing that.
Make a good try of it and you’ll see rewards.
Wok
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 12:36 PMOpt in filter at ISP level.
Awareness.
Parentel controls (windows has great ones)…
Alex
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 12:44 PMParental education, and holding parents responsible for raising their own kids that they chose to have. To many parents trying to be their kid’s “mates” and making everyone do the hard and unpopular work.
If you don’t want your 10 year old kids to browse the Internet unsupervised, why the hell did you give them a laptop and wifi access, and a lock on the inside of their bedroom door?
StevoTheDevo
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 1:09 PMI’ve not had much experience with it, but at one former workplace they used OpenDNS which seemed to be a fairly reliable, ready made, Opt-In filter system.
From my understanding, it’s basically a crowd-sourced blacklist based system. You select what types of sites you want to be blocked and you’re set.
The problem of course is teaching people how to set their router to direct to an alternate DNS than their ISP one…
But perhaps that could be done at ISP level via their members areas.
Sicarius123
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 6:58 PMDoes this slow down the connection noticably?
alien
Tuesday, January 31, 2012 at 4:46 PMthis is just one step to a fully blown out ‘great firewall of china’ isn’t it? First filter, next SOPA/PIPA/ACTA, next… full censorship. Seriously, all that I ask of my aussie government.. is to leave me the f*** alone.