Abstract
This paper investigates issues surrounding the Australian government’s proposed Internet ‘filter’ (censorship regime), to be based on existing ‘Refused Classification’ prohibitions relating to other media such as film and video
or publications. The planned legislation has focused debate on government
intervention in relation to the risks and dangers posed by the Internet, rather than
on the responsibilities and opportunities for both cultural and economic growth via
online networks, where potentially every user is a producer as well as a consumer.
The paper goes on to analyse the history of censorship classification systems,
showing how some aspects—such as the notion of a ‘reasonable adult’—survive
over decades without regard for cultural change, while others are quietly dropped
when they become embarrassing. The paper concludes that, since cultural norms
change over time and differ from one nation to the next, and that since they evolve
as a result of disagreement and debate, the best policy for government is not to
‘protect’ citizens as if they’re all vulnerable and uninformed children, but to protect the spirit of Karl Popper’s ‘open society’, where people learn to be independent and to choose for themselves: a prospect that seems as alien to the minister responsible for the legislation, Senator Conroy, as it appeared distant to Popper in 1945.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1-14 |
Number of pages | 14 |
Journal | Australian journal of communication |
Volume | 37 |
Issue number | 3 |
Publication status | Published - 2010 |
Externally published | Yes |