Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Australia The Internet Communications Government Your Rights Online

Australia Ranked Fourth In Internet Freedom 221

Posted by timothy
from the have-you-seen-our-town's-giant-blindfold? dept.
mjwx writes "A report published by Freedom House has placed Australia in fourth in Internet Freedom, below Estonia, the United States and Germany. Freedom House highlights the lack of actual censorship in Australia pointing out that the highly unpopular proposed ISP level censorship has been shelved since the 2010 Australian election. The Freedom House report is available here."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Australia Ranked Fourth In Internet Freedom

Comments Filter:
  • Below Germany? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bbqsrc (1441981) on Thursday April 21, 2011 @11:07PM (#35903426) Homepage
    I'm pretty sure Germany has actively filtered their internet before, and possibly still continue to do it. As for America, hello ICE domain seizures? Wtf.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 21, 2011 @11:08PM (#35903434)

    Why not whoever is in 83rd place? It seems like "Estonia Ranked First In Internet Freedom" would be the real story.

  • by rebelwarlock (1319465) on Thursday April 21, 2011 @11:28PM (#35903540)
    So only a handful of countries in the world have internet now? Or are we ignoring countries that "don't matter"? If you're going to pretend to do comprehensive reports, at least have a comprehensive list.
  • Re:Below Germany? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by rolfwind (528248) on Thursday April 21, 2011 @11:37PM (#35903588)

    No.

    That's a pretty stupid statement. If you want to look to active denial of past activities, look to Japan.

    BTW, how's the native population doing in the States?

  • Re:Below Germany? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Kreigaffe (765218) on Friday April 22, 2011 @12:11AM (#35903716)

    It wasn't a stupid statement, it was a poorly worded statement.

    Holocaust denial is illegal in Germany. So are swastikas, and pretty much anything related to the nazis outside of "bad things, very bad things, happened in the early half of the 20th century". I'm exaggerating but this is fucking slashdot and only a mindless pedant would misinterpret me as badly as you have.

    The fact is Germany *does* censor their internet, and the content they remove *is* related to that party that was pretty big a few generations back. In other words, what I said is accurate, just not very precise -- I didn't expect, but should have I suppose, that some asshole would come by and think I was making claims that are so obviously not fucking true that even an idiot would understand that that wasn't what I was saying. Censorship is not denialism, censorship is simply not allowing certain things to be said or seen; Germany engages in censorship, regardless of whether or not the things they censor are things that any decent person would think shouldn't be said or heard. That doesn't make it magically become not-censorship.

  • Re:Below Germany? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jd (1658) <<moc.oohay> <ta> <kapimi>> on Friday April 22, 2011 @12:41AM (#35903810) Homepage Journal

    Relative to what?

    Can you tell me, precisely, what bad things Sweden, Denmark, New Zealand or the Falkland Islands are doing that compare with intimidation and threats against companies that had links to Wikileaks?

    Can you tell me, precisely, how many domain seizures the UK has been involved in of late?

    Do you have any concrete examples of, oh, Lichtenstein ordering other nations to arrest minors and terrorize them for pissing off the MPAA?

    Can you name any country other than the US which forbids the distribution of World War I audio for copyright reasons?

    Inquiring lolcats wish to know.

  • Re:Below Germany? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dreampod (1093343) on Friday April 22, 2011 @01:27AM (#35903968)

    Failing to criticize our national governments simply because others do worse guarantees a slow creep towards that worse behaviour because anything less is, by your reasoning, acceptable. The fact that Iran, Burma, and China engage in broader and more extensive internet control and suppression doesn't make the ICE domain seizures more acceptable or infringe freedoms any less.

    Further, I personally believe that we have a greater obligation to ensure our home country is abiding by the principals we want other countries to. Not only does it clear us of hypocrisy (see US on torture and prisons) when attempting to convince other countries to reform their practices, it provides a clear example that it can be done without catastrophic consequences (assuming they don't see our culture itself being a catastrophe), and is how our government is structured to function. Limiting our scope to local issues is often a matter of conserving our efforts and avoiding tilting at windmills. I can't personally stop hunger in Africa but I can ensure my neighbours get invited over for dinner frequently because I know that the adults in their house frequently miss meals to ensure that their kids always get fed. The same principle applies to world affairs - I can make real (though small) changes in the US but ignoring them because China is worse leaves the entire world a worse place.

I have not yet begun to byte!

Working...