{"id":688,"date":"2010-01-13T14:03:53","date_gmt":"2010-01-13T04:03:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/machinegunkeyboard.com\/?p=688"},"modified":"2010-01-13T14:03:53","modified_gmt":"2010-01-13T04:03:53","slug":"senator-kate-lundy-comes-out-against-mandatory-internet-censorship","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/machinegunkeyboard.com\/?p=688","title":{"rendered":"Senator Kate Lundy comes out against mandatory internet censorship"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Good going, Senator Lundy.<\/p>\n<p>While \u2018opt-out\u2019 isn\u2019t ideal, mainly because filtering won\u2019t accomplish any of Conroy\u2019s stated goals, it\u2019s better than blanket mandatory filtering with no escape.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p><strong><a href=\"http:\/\/www.crikey.com.au\/2010\/01\/13\/labor-senator-kate-lundy-speaks-out-against-mandatory-internet-censorship\/\">Labor Senator Kate Lundy speaks out against mandatory internet censorship<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n<p>by James Whittaker (Crikey.com.au)<\/p>\n<p>At least one member of the federal government stands opposed to mandatory internet censorship, with Senator Kate Lundy pushing the Minister for an \u201copt-out\u201d alternative from the online blacklist.<\/p>\n<p>But Lundy says she has \u201ca job cut out for me\u201d lobbying colleagues before legislation is introduced to parliament next month. The former Labor front-bencher and passionate advocate for open IT has told Crikey she believes \u201cthe majority of caucus\u201d wants a mandatory filter in place.<\/p>\n<p>Lundy has used her blog to vent over her \u201cdiscomfort\u201d in Communications Minister Stephen Conroy\u2019s push for mandatory ISP-level blocking of websites refused classification, defying the government\u2019s commitment to the filter by outlining a \u201cpreferred approach\u201d including more effective parental education, internet skills development and voluntary filters at the desktop.<\/p>\n<p>Late last month Lundy wrote Conroy\u2019s proposal left \u201clittle room to move\u201d, but she suggested allowing ISPs to offer adult customers an \u201copt-out\u201d from the filter. This week she has begun canvassing support for the option among Labor colleagues.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cMy feeling is I\u2019ve got a tough job ahead of me,\u201d she says. Conroy has vowed to introduce legislation when parliament resumes on February 2.<\/p>\n<p>Lundy acknowledges the flaws in her own plan: there will be a stigma attached to requesting access to an unfiltered internet, and she admits it may \u201clead to interest by the authorities, even though individuals may simply want to ensure they are not having legitimate content filtered\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>But for Lundy it\u2019s the least-worst option. It \u201crespects people can make an informed choice\u201d while upholding a policy Labor took to the last election (she says she was against it then, too).<\/p>\n<p>Lundy backs Conroy and the process he has gone through in testing filtering technology while boosting funding for cyber crime enforcement. She never believed a filter was feasible but she says the government\u2019s testing has proven that false and she will support the final legislative outcome. But, as she has admitted on her blog, \u201cmany mechanisms used by criminal networks will not be stopped through a filtering mechanism\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA), a not-for-profit group leading the campaign against the filter, certainly agrees. Campaign manager Peter Black calls the opt-out compromise a \u201csignificant improvement\u201d, but the group is dedicated to a public campaign rejecting any filter altogether.<\/p>\n<p>EFA is investing all its funds in Black, a senior law lecturer specialising in new media at the Queensland University of Technology who will drive the campaign at least for the next three months. New branding and a website (\u201ca hub of campaign activity for all the different individuals and organisations\u201d against the filter) will launch soon to \u201cshift the focus away from the \u2018no clean feed\u2019 slogan to a more positive message not only on the flaws in the proposed filter but also provides solutions to the Australian public\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>For Lundy, this is a hobbyhorse. She is a former shadow minister of information technology, a stalwart of Senate inquiries into the subject (she claims not to have missed one in 14 years) and has been a long-time advocate for harnessing IT since working as a communications officer in the union movement. The internet, she says, \u201creally inspired me as a tool for empowerment\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>The ACT Senator says the public has not been properly educated on net safety and filtering technology since the Howard government first put forward censorship plans; the net filter has \u201cnever really been tested\u201d as an issue in the community.<\/p>\n<p>In her maiden speech to parliament in 1996, Lundy spoke of the \u201crewards that come from investing\u201d in IT. She said: \u201cThe importance of public policy relating to the use and control of credible information sources and its increasingly complex delivery technologies cannot be underestimated if we are serious about equitable and affordable access.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>From outside, the Labor ministry she has spearheaded the government\u2019s 2.0 online public participation initiative and led public forums on policy development. Last April, Lundy took on IT consultant and open source software advocate Pia Waugh as a full-time adviser on technology policy.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Good going, Senator Lundy. While \u2018opt-out\u2019 isn\u2019t ideal, mainly because filtering won\u2019t accomplish any of Conroy\u2019s stated goals, it\u2019s better than blanket mandatory filtering with no escape. Labor Senator Kate Lundy speaks out against mandatory internet censorship by James Whittaker (Crikey.com.au) At least one member of the federal government stands opposed to mandatory internet censorship, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-688","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/machinegunkeyboard.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/688","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/machinegunkeyboard.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/machinegunkeyboard.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/machinegunkeyboard.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/machinegunkeyboard.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=688"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/machinegunkeyboard.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/688\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/machinegunkeyboard.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=688"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/machinegunkeyboard.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=688"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/machinegunkeyboard.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=688"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}