FIGJAM: Internet censorship works! Just ask Exetel!
Tuesday May 05th 2009, 8:42 am


It has been predicted several times that ‘trials’ of mandatory internet censorship would invariably be heralded as great successes, given the lack of definition of ‘success‘ before trials were commenced.

ISP Exetel have just completed what they are calling a ‘trial’ of mandatory internet censorship. And ya know what? It’s a runaway success!

Never you mind that the ‘trial’ they ran bore no resemblance whatsoever to the requirements of Rudd’s plan. But that’s not important! Exetel claim it works… depending upon your definition of ‘works,’ of course.

Mysteries abound, though. Exetel’s Steve Waddington is now so convinced of the need for and lack of harm of mandatory filtering that he’s gone from staunch filter opponent to calling staunch filter opponents ‘crazies‘ in the span of 5 months. Waddington’s coarse and completely unprofessional flaming of an unhappy home & commercial Exetel customer is fully gobsmacking. So, how exactly did Waddington’s opinion change so radically? Was he sold a pup by the censorware vendor? Was he told to change his mind by Exetel Boss John Linton? Who knows. Regardless, I’ve been shopping for a replacement for my Optus service since they announced they’d be participating in a flawed ‘trial’ as well. Exetel’s well and truly earned a spot on my never-in-a-million-years list.

But, if Exetel’s results are to believed, internet filtering WORKS… as long as your banlist is infinitesimally small, involves a statistically insignificant number of users and doesn’t filter YouTube or Wikipedia.

You can score a squillion points a minute if you have Conroy™ brand goal posts. A mile wide, fully portable, put ’em anywhere you like!


4 Comments so far
Leave a comment

Mark Newton sums up the travels of the Conroy™ Brand mobile goal posts:

The situation we’re in now is:

* In 2007 it was “ACMA Prohibited Content.”
* On Nov 11 2008 it was “ACMA Prohibited Content and other unwanted material.”
* At the end of March it was ACMA Prohibited Content
* On Insight it became “almost exclusively Refused Classification”
* On April 7 it became “never stated that we were going to do anything other than refused classification.”
* On April 26 it became “The scope of the definition of prohibited content in legislation cannot be expanded … the Government does not intend doing this.”

Love to know what’ll be blacklisted this week

Comment by weez 05.11.09 @ 10:01 am

Leave a comment



Fatal error: Uncaught Error: Call to undefined function show_subscription_checkbox() in /home/www/ Stack trace: #0 /home/www/ require() #1 /home/www/ comments_template() #2 /home/www/ include('/home/www/machi...') #3 /home/www/ require_once('/home/www/machi...') #4 /home/www/ require('/home/www/machi...') #5 {main} thrown in /home/www/ on line 155