Blog post week 4
Posted by vyf693 on April 13, 2010
Filed under Uncategorized
Implications of Internet Filtering
Majority of cyberworld are against government ISP level Internet filtering; experts, ISPs, the common public and even google have advised they think it will be pointless (The Australian, 2010). And most of digc102’s blogs revolve around the same direction. SO, straight to the point…
In my opinion, what’s causing the most controversy is the limit of free speech and the restrictions of innocent users gathering information needed for their own harmless curiosity.
EXAMPLES OF IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PUBLIC
Caring Mother: I fear my daughter has anorexia and I want to find out more about what she is doing and where she is getting these ideas from
DENIED – pro-anorexia sites will appear on the blacklist filter (ABC, 2007); although there are benefits of restricting these sites from teenagers, it can cause angst for someone like a mother who wants to find out what behaviors she can be on the lookout for
Confused teenager: I feel like I dont fit in.. I want to get some information that will guide me in the right direction
DENIED – although its a form of discrimination, gay and lesbian forums and websites, as well as some religious pages, are going to be restricted (3 News, 2009)
EXAMPLE OF IMPLICATION FOR ACADEMICS / RESEARCHERS
Medical researchers would have limited access to drug-related information, which can limit examinations, theories and also the development of medicines (3 News, 2009)
EXAMPLE OF IMPLICATION FOR ARTISTS
Artistic Nudes may no longer be accessible as they are considered perverse. And its ART?! A whole culture could become close to extinct (ABC, 2007)
EXAMPLES OF IMPLICATIONS FOR JOURNALISTS
Perez Hilton: I need to get some info on heroine so I can demonstrate that Lindsay Lohans gotta return to rehab.
DENIED – access to anything related to drug use is restricted (ACMA, 2009)
In conclusion, although the government is trying to make a credible move through filtering and “making the internet a less scary place”, restricting access to websites may not be an appropriate method, as it can also cause more implications than good. Through reading many reviews and opinions of the topic, I feel that filtering is an anti-utilitarian approach – this action does not provide the greatest good for the greatest number of people!
Reference
ACMA, 2009, accessed: 16/04/2010, http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD..PC/pc=PC_90102
The Australian. 2010, accessed 16/04/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/australian-it/no-proof-isp-filtering-works-abbott/story-e6frgakx-1225850260443
ABC, 2007, accessed 16/04/2010, http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/12/31/2129471.htm
3 News, 2009, accessed 16/04/2010, http://www.3news.co.nz/Concerns-raised-over-secret-internet-blacklist/tabid/412/articleID/112859/Default.aspx
Comments
Leave a Reply
