IN PICTURES: hundreds protest govt net censorship

bloopletech (New user):

I've written a blog post on the protests in Adelaide with photo: http://geek.viewfromwithin.net/wpmu/2008/12/13/internet-censorship-australia-says-no/

Please digg it, so we can get the word out there more: http://digg.com/politics/Internet_Censorship_Australia_Says_No

bloopletech (New user):

(removed)

TV Bis (User):

Well if the minister looks at these pics - he ain't going to back down very quickly. It looks like everyone is too woried about their Porn viewing being restricted...........

Angus Kidman (APC staff):

Well, viewing consensual sex by adults is supposed to be legal -- but under the proposals, it wouldn't be. So it's a legitimate concern.

McBanjo (User):

Conroy's not going to win any brownie points from most working families. So I still fail to see his motivation.

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Conroy is not going to win period!

A noisy rabble and some megaphone banter is only the noisy and visible tip of opposition to divisive government. There are far more effective ways to protest, but to each their own.
Neither Conroy, Labor or any other brand of self serving politician is going to be allowed to interfere with my life without a fight.

John Kaye (New user):

Hi Angus

Your comment "The next scheduled speaker was supposed to be Greens' Senator John Kaye, but he got held up in transit (and ultimately never appeared)." is incorrect. I was not scheduled to speak until 2:00 pm by arrangement with the organisers. I was not caught in transit but had another engagement. I did turn up at 1:30 pm.

I wonder if you would mind correcting your piece.

For the record, the Greens strongly oppose the proposed net filter and have been working with the digital community to stop it.

Thanks

John Kaye
Greens NSW MP

Angus Kidman (APC staff):

The impression the audience got from the comments from the organisers was that originally you were due to appear earlier, but were delayed. Jerry did mention that they'd eventually arranged for you to appear at 2pm, and they apologised when it became clear things were going to wind up before that, but my recollection is that the event didn't close until close to 1:30pm anyway, so you can't have missed the opportunity by much.

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting John Kaye:
I was not caught in transit but had another engagement. I did turn up at 1:30 pm.

And these are the kind of organisational skills that would bring good government?


Quoting John Kaye:
but he got held up in transit (and ultimately never appeared)." is incorrect.

Politicians who hold more focus on their own public image than the issues they are supposed to address again are a dime a dozen.

You've got a forum available to express proposed policy and to point out flaws in government policy, isn't that far more important than the piddling details of when and where?


PS: (not answering question and only putting forward a well rehearsed set of policy lines to the public regardless of what questions are asked wont help your party cause. If we wanted behavior like that why would we not be content with the current team?)

Dave The Happy Singer (New user):

Thanks for the great report, Angus!

I had a ball yesterday, and I'm so grateful to everyone who turned up. We need to send a clear message of 'DO NOT WANT' to the government.

But we also need to raise awareness with the public. Let's get the issue of Internet Censorship explained clearly. and in terms a little bit more sophisticated than 'well, you must hate children'! While we're at it. Senator Conroy would do well to listen in, just in case people ask him questions in parliament.

So it's important we show our numbers and make our voice heard. Sincere thanks to those who came and did that yesterday. As Angus's closing paragraph hinted, it would be very optimistic to hope that the Government will suddenly see reason, and we may have to plug away at this for a while! Check out http://marchinmarch.org/ to stay in touch. Don't give us up, let us down, run around or desert us, guys!

We also need the support of the media, so sincere thanks again for the great article, Angus.

All in all, I'm making a note here: huge success.

Take care and Stay Happy!

Dave The Happy Singer
xxx

P.S. Your hyperlink is broken in the first paragraph... jus' sayin'.

Tin (Senior Forumologist):

I'm confused as to why it would be easy to hack because it's running on RedHat boxes... Unless all the solutions are using RH8 or older as their OS.

Did any mainstream media cover the events? Seven News, etc?

Yakko (New user):

I was just listening to this podcast where the MD of Internode was interviewed: http://blogs.bnetau.com.au/aussierules/2008/12/03/broadband-censorship-copyright-and-complaints-btalk-australia/
And it seems like the avenue that the government is trying to use to censor child pornography is not even the same one that is more likely to be used by the child pornographers themselves: i.e. VPN and peer-to-peer. So this expense and blocking of our rights are going to be all for nothing! If these child pornographers have a website, it would not be easy to find that the general public would stumble on it, and if found, it would be easy enough for the AFP (or Interpol) to trace it and catch them. In essence, the child pornography reason looks more and more like a decoy rather than the real reason for installing this equipment in our ISPs, unless our Stephen Conroy is really that misguided.

Phillip (New user):

The rally was great. So many people turned up, even though it was so hot. Dave The Happy Singer was truly a highlight of the event. Much fun was had.

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting Phillip:
Much fun was had.

One would have thought that wasn't the purpose of a protest rally? Fun can be had at Luna Park, but that doesn't send a message to government that we wont stand for their manipulative and unnecessary policy.

Phillip (New user):

Quoting Raindog:
"Quoting Phillip:
Much fun was had.

One would have thought that wasn't the purpose of a protest rally"

Having fun is always welcome, no matter what else is going on. A protest doesn't need to be a miserable affair to be effective.

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting Phillip:
A protest doesn't need to be a miserable affair to be effective.

On the flip-side a protest that looks like a picnic, makes it far easier, for media and manipulative politicians to trivialise the issue at hand. Fair or otherwise that will be the mainstream perception.

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

duplicate

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

duplicate

graham.lv (User):

There was no coverage on Ch.10 or 7 TV in Perth, WA. But it was a big, big, news day, so may have not made the cut. Except it was pissing down all over the east. River wall fell off apt. block in Syd.

You may be surprised to know that censorship for relatively mild things are already in place on 'cloud' storage, thanks to conservative and highly religious Disneyland America. The U.S. will dominate 'cloud' storage and any hint of a pair of tits will bring deletion. Tell that to the sex party.

PaulBBrisbane (New user):

"...someone opportunistically trying to sell copies of Green Left Weekly". Hardly opportunistic - GLW has consistently opposed censorship, attacks on civil liberties, and has fought for years against the monopolisation of media. Check out http://www.greenleft.org.au/2008/777/40052 for an article in the current issue opposing the govt plans.

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting PaulBBrisbane:
Hardly opportunistic

Opportunistic: def (adj) Taking immediate advantage, often unethically, of any circumstance of possible benefit.

A probably like minded crowd equals an "advantage" or opportunity for for potential sales of your publication. I wont speculate my personal opinion regarding ethics of GLW, as the definition will cater for both ethical and unethical intent.

So you see Angus was quite correct in his initial observation.

PaulBBrisbane (New user):

Yes, you can defend the "opportunistic" statement as not absolutely false, yet it clearly can be interpreted in a negative light - especially as only GLW was singled out. The impression readers may get is that GLW has done nothing for this cause and just flown in for the rally (a practice which could indeed understandably frustrate people). Thus I was clarifying GLW's longstanding opposition to censorship, and publicity for anti-censorship causes and events (GLW promoted this particular rally also).
For further background on our "opportunistic" coverage, readers can check out:
ALP plans to censor the internet
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2008/736/38111
Censorship and the `silenced majority'
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2004/568/33116
Censorship: our rights under attack
http://www.greenleft.org.au/1996/221/14955
No internet censorship!
http://www.greenleft.org.au/1999/362/18744

Raindog (Senior Forumologist):

Quoting PaulBBrisbane:
Yes, you can defend the "opportunistic" statement as not absolutely false

No your not listening, check back and you will see I clearly stated that the usage of the word opportunistic was entirely correct.

Quoting PaulBBrisbane:
yet it clearly can be interpreted in a negative light

indeed it can.


Quoting PaulBBrisbane:
especially as only GLW was singled out

Were there others there opportunistically selling their periodicals too? Were you singled out or just the only ones taking the opportunity to sell periodicals at the event?


Quoting PaulBBrisbane:
The impression readers may get is

are you suggesting the Author should have not mentioned your sale of periodicals? Wouldn't insistence of this be a form of censorship?


Quoting PaulBBrisbane:
I was clarifying GLW's longstanding opposition to censorship

wouldn't mention of your attendance at the rally and your opportunistic sale of periodicals at the same event, give any reader here a definite impression that GLW was in fact anti-censorship?



Quoting PaulBBrisbane:
For further background on our "opportunistic" coverage

well thanks all the same but your opportunistic offer and your via the APC forum has not inspired me to click the links. I know the opportunity was there, but the desire was not.

I'm glad GLW sees fit to object to Net censorship, on that we agree, but I doubt there would be much other common ground. Thanks for the opportunity but no thanks.

The Big Baboo (Advanced Forumologist):

See this is what happens when you put a QLD politician in charge of the country.We should have all learned from years ago when Joh-BP was Premier over there for all those years.Combine that with the Labor Party and you have a recipe for disaster.
This thing will take us back to the good old days of dial-up which for me would probably mean for me ditching the internet altogether.
Not necessarily a bad thing as I wouldn't need anti-virus,a firewall and a few other thingies which take up space on this old box of mine and I could probably concentrate on playing games or doing my digital video editing and a few other things like that. Damn I probably wouldn't be able to access You-Tube and watch music videos :(
O I forgot sometimes these programs have to up-date themselves :(
Grrrrrrrrrr Give the b......s hell I say or throw them out at the next election which won't come too soon as far as I'm concerned.
Ah well :) A Merry Xmas & Happy New Year to all and keep fighting the good fight :)