An Aussie living in Frankfurt.

Australian IT is carrying a blog post by Bernadette McMenamin which is just full of mis-representation and spin.

One of the most horrendous developments that we have experienced in the last 15 years is the dramatic explosion in the global trade of child sexual abuse images on the internet.

No one really knows the true quantities because it is mostly traded via peer to peer and over encrypted networks. And none of these channels will be addressed by the proposed filter. Ref: http://libertus.net/censor/ispfiltering-au-govplan.html#s_stats

76 per cent would change to an ISP that blocked child pornography

There are ISPs that provide filtered access already, yet their market share is not overly large so while the polls track the sentiment it doesn’t appear to flow through to action. Markets respond to demand, it’s clearly not there. Ref: http://libertus.net/censor/ispfiltering-au-govplan.html#s_10

Law enforcement and education are also key strategies and prominent in the Federal Government’s Safe internet Policy.

So why is the AFP budget for this going down and not up? Ref: http://libertus.net/censor/ispfiltering-au-govplan.html#s_38

Hundreds of millions of dollars is already being spent on law enforcement which is commendable but this only addresses the problem after the abuse has occurred.

ISP filtering has the same problem.

Critics of this new scheme have argued that ISP filtering of child sexual abuse images simply will not work. However these filters are actually working very effectively in Scandinavian countries and in the UK as well as in recent trials in New Zealand.

None of these examples is representative of what the ALP is proposing. Ref: http://libertus.net/censor/ispfiltering-au-govplan.html#s_6

Critics have also argued that ISP filtering will be costly and slow down the internet. Again based on overseas experience this is not the case.

The New Zealand trial is not equivalent to what the ALP is proposing. Nor does it refute the view that the filtering will slow access speeds.

My argument is that how can blocking illegal material (which should not be produced or stored in the first place) be censorship?

And many, if not all, would agree with you. But the ALP is proposing to block prohibited material not all of which is illegal. Ref: http://libertus.net/censor/ispfiltering-au-govplan.html#s_21

Having said that I remain open minded as I hope the critics of the scheme will wait until the trials have been independently conducted to decide on whether Australia should take this leap into ISP filtering.

I think we’re all keen to see the results of the trials. Just have to wait till they are completed…

…any minute now…