How would you vote on the internet filter?

Dan Warne
13 July 2010, 1:06 PM


Send to a friend Print

Numerous major media outlets are running a poll today asking whether you will vote for a party that endorses the internet filter. Vote now!


In something of a first for major media outlets, we're conducting an experiment -- running the same poll (literally the same one, hosted on polldaddy.com) on numerous outlets. It's on major newspaper websites as well as on APC and other local tech sites -- and we want to know how you plan to vote on election day.

Note, we're not asking you to tell us whether you vote Labor, Liberal, Green, Family First or the Australian Sex Party -- we just want to know whether you would vote for any political party that endorsed compulsory internet filtering of Australians' internet connections.

The site that's hosting the poll, PollDaddy.com, doesn't allow you to vote for a poll more than once -- even if you go to other websites to vote on it. (Obviously this can be bypassed if you actively try to do so, but unless you deliberately try to subvert the system, it does have protection against double-voting.)

Naturally, this poll isn't designed to show a scientific representation of anything -- it's a self-selecting audience rather than a random sample, but it will, nonetheless, send a message to politicans if they see many thousands of people saying they will, or will not, vote for a party that endorses compulsory internet filtering.

So vote now, and explain why you voted how you did in the comments below.


Post your comment



Comments

 RSS feed Email alert

agami (New user):

What surprises me is just how much of an issue this has become. Why is it even on the table? The second someone proposed the idea of nation-wide mandatory internet filtering they should have been laughed out of the room. It's such a waste of resources. Where their attention should be spent is in legislating the removal of internet usage charges based on kB up and/or down. That's the key to a new digital economy.

13 July 2010, 2:09 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Dan Warne (Regular user):

I don't really have a problem with data metering -- after all, water is metered, gas is metered, electricity is metered.. the problem is not so much the metering, but the usage limits/pricing. I think we're at a point now where the usage limits are so high (and frequently increasing) that data metering is not a limitation in itself. After all, the more traffic ISPs carry, the more network resources they have to provision, and this costs money -- I'd rather have a properly provisioned internet in Australia than what they have in the US which is unlimited everywhere, but often with crap performance compared to what we see on Australian ISPs.

13 July 2010, 3:02 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

agami (New user):

In principle I agree with you. Internet should be more like other utilities. I tend to lean toward a bandwidth only charge model as it's easier on the billing system, but a data (one way) only charge model also works. It shouldn't be both bandwidth and data.


13 July 2010, 3:11 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Pauly (New user):

there should be another option that says "yes but only because there are more important issues than this, i will still voice my displeasure with any mandatory filter"

13 July 2010, 2:29 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Dan Warne (Regular user):

But all that matters is you will vote for the political party regardless of their internet filter policy. The point of this poll is to clarify for how many people the internet filter is a vote-changer.

13 July 2010, 3:03 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Pauly (New user):

Quoting Dan Warne:
The point of this poll is to clarify for how many people the internet filter is a vote-changer.

But do you really think that most people voting on this poll will look at the next election as a 1 policy decision? Currently both major parties support a filter of some kind. If you vote for a minor party and they dont get 30% or more of the primary vote, then it comes down to preferences.
You can voice your displeasure without resorting to "if you dont do this, i wont vote for you". Something that is said a lot but rarely acted on (and the politicians know it)

Is it that different from supporters of the filter doing a poll that asks - Do you support people accessing kiddy porn?
Yes
No

13 July 2010, 5:04 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

agami (New user):

There wouldn't be many more important things than freedom of speech. This isn't just about the filter but rather what the act of implementing a mandatory nation-wide filter represents. It's all just a bunch of local industry protectionism veiled in a moral code and sold using fear. The way I see it, those corporate fat cats should have lobbied for changes to expand their opportunities rather than for systems and policies to maintain their status quo. The net is the 21C communications infrastructure and platform and there are those out there who would like it to stay in the 20th century.


13 July 2010, 2:45 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

todd_h86 (User):

I will be voting for Labor even if it goes through, I cannot stand being under a liberal government again. Besides, I, like most users, will be able to easily bypass it anyway and share the knowledge on how to do so.

13 July 2010, 4:13 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

agami (New user):

You're vote is for Labor, but your sentiment and statements are pure Liberal.

13 July 2010, 5:06 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Regular user):

Quoting todd_h86:
I will be voting for Labor even if it goes through, I cannot stand being under a liberal government again.


So vote outside the duopoloy. You'll be very unlikely to only have candidates for those 2 parties on your ballot paper. Chances are you'll get a 2 party member, but if people vote outside the 2 parties, it sends a message in the poll results, and they try far harder to impress your electorate.

13 July 2010, 9:06 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

deeviation (New user):

totally bias poll.

13 July 2010, 4:36 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

CCCMikey (New user):

The problem is the poll is for media savvy voters only. Those people who are still struggling to comprehend how their new set top box work, and have no computer, will likely either not care or simply think it's a good thing since it will 'keep that filth away'

13 July 2010, 7:02 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Tin (Regular user):

Quoting CCCMikey:
Those people who are still struggling to comprehend how their new set top box work, and have no computer, will likely either not care or simply think it's a good thing


And also likely will just vote the same way they have every year for the last X-ty Y-ven years, making this poll completely irrelevant to them anyway.

14 July 2010, 7:01 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

magao (User):

I have always had a strong socialist leaning and I firmly believe that there should be a safety net for everyone. I have traditionally been a Labor voter, but have voted both Democrat and Green in the past. In all cases, my vote has preferenced to Labor. Interestingly, since I've been independent I've largely lived in strongly-Liberal locations, and anyone looking at my income would probably conclude that I would support the Liberals.

I will vote Green above Labor, but Labor above the coalition, as the idea of Abbott as PM is totally abhorrent. I will be voting below the line in the Senate in the hopes that the Greens will hold the balance of power in their own right. I think the current situation is unworkable, but having Labor hold power in the lower house, and the Greens hold the balance in the Senate, just maybe will mean the worst stuff will be blocked, and some useful legislation may get through.

Unfortunately, I live in NSW and so do not get to vote Conroy dead last.

13 July 2010, 7:17 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

agami (New user):

I am a Socialist and my comments are made in terms of what's best for the country and not so much what's best for me. I'm tech savvy enough to find and apply filter workarounds. So I'll state it again, from a socialist point of view, a zero-opt-out-option filter is bad for Australia.

13 July 2010, 7:39 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

J.McDonald (New user):

I have not yet decided for whom i would vote in the upcoming election. I will not support internet filtering as it puts in place mechanisms by which my freedom of speech and information could be censored.

13 July 2010, 8:10 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

I Geek and I Vote (User):

Pollies take note: The results speak for themselves.

13 July 2010, 8:51 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

J876 (User):

The reason why I voted No is simple technically it can be bypassed easily and is a waste of money. Also China has been copping a lot of flack for doing the same thing worldwide although at a more extreme level.

Who decides what gets blacklisted? The goverment of the day which is open to abuse and manipulation. I don't want politicians and public servants like Steven Conroy regulating or manipulating the internet which is a Global Network.

14 July 2010, 12:10 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Kim Gardener (New user):

Any internet censorship must be controlled by courts not government

14 July 2010, 6:28 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Sakash (New user):

What really bothers me about this, (besides the fact that it such a stupid idea that shouldn't have even been brought up) is the fact that none of us will be able to see this blacklist, not have any say in it and the fact that we should just accept their judgments. So basically the politicians are just saying "hey, trust us". Fat chance of that happening

14 July 2010, 7:37 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Me In Oz (Advanced Forumologist):

Here's the sobering reality, the net filter will be a non-issue because:

1 - Labor supporters always vote Labor
2 - Conservatives will always vote coalition
3 - The other parties are insignificant
4 - The 5% of swing voters (that do change governments) will vote for whoever they feel are giving them the most money

Here endeth Australian Politics 101.
Cheers

14 July 2010, 8:53 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Megab (New user):

If defies belief that any rational person would elect a Government that boasts it intends to introduce a SECRET censorship blacklist blocking any views with which it disagrees

14 July 2010, 9:32 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Voter (New user):

Sounds like Adolf Hitler all over again, taking away peoples rights bit by bit using excuses that it is for their own good and then denying them information they did not want the public to know, and we all know how that ended up don't we. And what are the guidelines - Whatever they deem objectionable ?????
Let's face it Australia is a 2 party system, IE; 1 wins power the other is in opposition and they all once again have their snouts in the taxpayer funded trough. Basically both as pathetic as the other in my book, why don't they add an extra box you can tick on the voting form for "None of the Above" at least then people could clearly express their displeasure with the current political parties and best of all no politician/party gets paid for your valid vote (that money could go to charities or hospitals etc instead) and they might actually start listening to the people (their Bosses) once again.
CONTROL THE INFORMATION AND YOU CONTROL THE PEOPLE.

15 July 2010, 12:12 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

MarrkDaviid (New user):

This is how I see it:

Labor - Internet Filter, Make ISPs keep users browsing history

Liberals - Will not continue with the NBN and will keep Australia in the digital stone age.

I would rather vote for the Labor party and bypass the filter if necessary, than vote for the Liberal party and hold Australia back.

15 July 2010, 1:52 AM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Linoob (New user):

What a monumental waste. I agree with Sakash. Like that line in Young Einstein " If you can't trust the government who can you trust?" Just so some bureaucrat can filter out bad comments about the government. This idea is nothing more than the thin end of a wedge for all sorts of [invisible] [non transparent]government censorship!

17 July 2010, 5:58 PM (1 year ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Not signed in
anonymous user Anonymous user