To filter, or not to filter? Thus is Australia's crisis.

The Internet is big big world by itself and is accessed everyday by millions of people all over the planet of all ages. Everyday new websites are popping up. As responsible surfers, do we know which sites are appropriate for viewing and which ones are not?

I'm sure many of you Internet surfers have come across mature warnings on websites before.

Mature warnings for DeviantArt and Youtube. To turn off these mature content filters, the user has to be legally eighteen years old.

Usually websites that contain mature content will display a warning to the users, then prompting the users to verify their age (members are required to submit birthdates upon registration).

A media report (2008) from ABC.net.au states that the government of Australia is looking to implement a nationwide filter on the Internet. This has become subject to a lot of questioning and criticism. Questions surface, such as "What websites will be deemed inappropriate?" and "What type of websites are on the list of sites that will be banned?"

Michael Meloni (2008) states that the government filter doesn't allow for any fine-tuning and is a poor substitution for parents' or guardians' discretion. The filtering system is 'one size fits all' and this will pose to be a problem for a household as teenagers, children and adults in a family usually share one computer.

He says "As for banning websites that are 'inappropriate', is the Government really in the best position to decide what that is?" First of all, how does a government, let alone a community decide what is to be inappropriate and appropriate? And in what context is a website considered inappropriate or appropriate? Nate Anderson (2008) says, in lieu of their "Save The Children" campaign, the government has called for hardcore sex and drug content to be totally blacklisted, even though adults are of legal age to access this content.

Schirato and Yell (p. 43, 1996) states that social semiotics studies how and why people make meanings differently according to who and where they are socially and culturally. The Australian government has decided to ban websites that Australia as a nation have 'supposedly' made meaning of them to be inappropriate. Then why is there so much criticism? Electronic Frontiers Australia chairman Dale Clapperton (Australia: Filtered Internet Criticised, 2008) says that Australia is run based on liberal democracy, where adults should be able to say and read what they want, and not just what the government decides is appropriate for them.

I am not an Australian citizen, so this issue does phase me one bit. However it is essential for a community to fully understand how they make meanings of situations under within the same context to prevent problems like this from arising.

References:

Schirato, T, & Yell, S 1996, Communication and cultural literacy: an introduction, St. Leonards, New South Wales.

Funnell, A 2008, The Great Firewall of Australia, The Media Report, ABC Radio National, viewed 10 November 2008,
<http://www.abc.net.au/rn/mediareport/stories/2008/2405376.htm>

2008, Australia: Filtered Internet Criticised, Political Affairs.net, viewed 10 November 2008,
<http://www.politicalaffairs.net/article/articleview/6454/1/314/>

Meloni, M 2008, The high price of Internet filtering, ABC News, viewed 10 November 2008,
<http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/10/24/2399876.htm>

Anderson, N 2008, Australia's Internet filter: could legal content be banned too?, Ars Technica, viewed 10 November 2008,
<http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20081028-australias-internet-filter-could-legal-content-be-banned-too.html>