Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Censorship Your Rights Online

Australian Teachers Try To Shut Down Website 441

DeathElk writes "New South Wales teachers are attempting to have a website based in the United States closed down due to "defamatory" content. The site in question encourages students to rate teachers at their school, which obviously results in some colorful content. Now the story has hit the media, with some insightful quotes such as "The president of the NSW Secondary Principals Council, Jim McAlpine, said the Federal Government should block access to 'scurrilous American websites'."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Australian Teachers Try To Shut Down Website

Comments Filter:
  • Great Firewall of Oz (Score:5, Interesting)

    by m0rm3gil ( 567905 ) on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @10:55PM (#18967671)
    I was just listening to Radio National (oz public radio station) do a story on this. One of the people interviewed said that China is capable of blocking websites from overseas so maybe something similar should start up in Australia. I find it kind of disturbing that people believe that the great firewall is a rational response to the potential slander of some teachers.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by PC-PHIX ( 888080 ) *
      But the Great Firewall of Oz could become a significant landmark!

      I have heard the Great Firewall of China can be seen from SPACE!

    • by mjwx ( 966435 ) on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @11:48PM (#18968101)
      Wont happen,

      Those kind of nut cases are the vocal minority of Australians. Family and/or religious groups like the American Family Association but with a much smaller member base per capita (but just as loud and annoying). Most Australians don't care, in fact not giving a crap is our national past time.

      The whiners will continue to whine and the govt will pretend to do something but when push comes to shove, the businesses of australia (which have a vested interest in unfiltered traffic) will push little Johnnie or heavy Kevvy (doesn't really matter who wins the elections) that much more harder than the whiners.

      All that could possibly come out of this is a taxpayer funded opt in service which given our governments inability to do anything technical, would be completely useless.

      I'd just like to say to the govt that if you're going to spend money stupidly, spend it on FTTN ((optic) Fibre To The Node, FIOS I believe is the Yank equivalent) and cut telstra (AU's largest phone Co.) out of it But like the firewall, that will never happen.
      • by iminplaya ( 723125 ) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @01:25AM (#18968691) Journal
        Those kind of nut cases are the vocal minority of Australians....Most Australians don't care, in fact not giving a crap is our national past time.

        Next thing you know those nut cases are in office. It happened in the states already. It could happen there.
        • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

          by mjwx ( 966435 )

          Next thing you know those nut cases are in office. It happened in the states already. It could happen there.
          It sounds like you're bit behind the times over there mate, have you seen our Prime Minister. Our leaders are just as idiotic as yours, the only differences are that no-one listens to them and no-one thinks its worth bribing them.
          • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

            by iminplaya ( 723125 )
            That doesn't make them any less dangerous. Despite all the protests, they sent troops to Iraq and Afganistan. Many more people are put into harm's way by their actions. If you ignore them, they'll just keep on doing it. We actually should make some effort to stop them from causing any more damage. And another thing, in a more or less democratic country, an "idiotic" leader is not a very good reflection of the people that gave him the job.
            • by mjwx ( 966435 ) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @02:21AM (#18969079)
              I was trying to be humorous.

              We (australia) know that John Howard (Australian Prime Minister) is dangerous, but we also know that Howard is smart enough not to do something too stupid. Howard will get away with sending troops to Iraq so long as there aren't pictures of dead Aussie soldiers on the front page every second day. Howard only deployed a small force of SASr's (commando's) to Iraq to prevent a major backlash.

              Alas the sad state of democracy these days, we're no longer voting for the put best candidate in, we're voting to keep the worst ones out. Which is precisely how Howard has won 4 elections.

              On a more humorous side note, someone should tell Republican party if they want to help John Howard win this years election they should be voicing support for the other party. Every time Bush or Cheney give support for Howard opposition leader Kevin Rudd gets a surge in the polls.
      • spend it on FTTN ... and cut telstra out of it

        Just out of interest, what do you think would be the main benefit from the govt selling the rest of Telstra to fund the construction of publicly owned telecommunications infrastructure, ie another Telstra? Or are you intimating this would also be a stupid move?

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by badfish99 ( 826052 )
        Don't be so sure it won't happen.

        Here in the UK we've already got a "great firewall of the UK", to prevent access to child pornography sites. Of course it was easy for the politicians to get that in place: no-one was willing to argue against it.
        But once the technology in in place, it's impossible for the ISPs to argue that they "cannot block internet sites", because it is already being done. So there is a steady trickle of calls for the same filter to be used to block sites that "glorify terrorism" or
    • by TubeSteak ( 669689 ) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @12:20AM (#18968301) Journal

      I find it kind of disturbing that people believe that the great firewall is a rational response to the potential slander of some teachers.
      It's a shame that the response to "potential slander" (i suspect you mean to say libel) is to silence the criticism instead of investigating the claims.

      But then again, when teachers unionize, there often isn't much you can do to get rid of the underperforming educators. I bet that if you dig deep enough, you'll find union leaders are the ones getting the most upset over these libelous claims.

      I wonder if truth is a defense against slander/libel/defamation in Australia. It isn't in England, which is where the Aussies borrow much of their law from.
      • by Mathinker ( 909784 ) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @12:45AM (#18968481) Journal
        > I wonder if truth is a defense against slander/libel/defamation in Australia. It isn't in England

        Yes it is, just that the burden of proof is on the defendent, not the plaintiff. Read the article in Wikipedia [wikipedia.org].
      • I wonder if truth is a defense against slander/libel/defamation in Australia. It isn't in England, which is where the Aussies borrow much of their law from.

        Not quite. IANAL, but I did ask one about this not long ago. In America, the truth is an absolute defense against slander or libel. That is, if you can prove that what you said or wrote is true, you're home free. In Britain, the truth is a defense, but not an absolute defense. If you can prove you told the truth but the plaintiff can show that he

    • dicks, sometimes.

      I heard a teacher from the Uk talking about the UK version of the site, calling for the government to regulate it or shut it down.

      His argument was that, he had a series of ten comments about him, eight of which were glowing - utterly positive - but because the other two were a little negative - and not abusive or defamatory, mind - the whole thing was an outrage, and Something Should Be Done(TM).

      This guy wasn't just any old teacher either, he was the head of some teacher's union, speaking i
      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by drsmithy ( 35869 )

        Maybe it's the result of having a constant work environment where the principle relationship with people is one of authority and, perhaps, a lack of firm grounding in that authority, that results in such hypersensitivity to criticism. Whatever the reason, they should get a bleedin' grip.

        Probably has more to do with the constant public criticism they face from idiots who don't realise how valuable a service they provide.

        Heck, look no further than Slashdot. The typical article involving teachers usually h

  • oops (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wizardforce ( 1005805 ) on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @10:57PM (#18967683) Journal
    every time you try to censor something in today's tech world you end up attracting more attention than if you had left it alone. besides, how can they possibly enforce this? they cant block the site at home or any cyber cafe or anywhere but the school's computers.
    • Re:oops (Score:5, Insightful)

      by catwh0re ( 540371 ) on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @11:38PM (#18968013)
      I didn't know this website existed, that is until I read the article on SMH.com.au. While they don't mention the website's url a quick google for "school teacher rating" pulled up the right page.. a few links down and I was writing reviews for some of the poorest teachers I had ever experienced.

      Just like the HD-DVD hex code, once you start giving these things publicity (no matter how you direct it) you'll always get people doing whatever they want with the newly found information.

      If they wanted this problem to go away they should have ignored it, not plea with the government to have the website banned.

    • True. The Australian government can't block the site from homes and cyber-cafes.
      That is why they are hoping to convince America to take the site down.
  • Gulp... Hope they don't ban slashdot too ;-(
  • by pecosdave ( 536896 ) on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @10:59PM (#18967699) Homepage Journal
    most Austrailians I've met in person have been pretty cool people, but there seems to be a large portion of their online population who are big on censorship. At one point I was a very active member on a Stargate message board, but ther was an Aussie admin who was constantly closing threads as "Asked and answered" "No longer relavent" and the best yet "Off Topic" the funny part about the off topic one was that it was in a section of the board specifically labeled as the Off Topic section. I got the board admin in on it (he wasn't usually watching what was going on) and got their over zealous modding slowed down, but I stood my ground. I wasn't going to post anymore unless they reopend some wrongly closed threads, they didn't.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      And the once-thriving Stargate community has never fully recovered from losing you :(
    • by QuantumG ( 50515 ) <qg@biodome.org> on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @11:03PM (#18967717) Homepage Journal
      Newsflash: Australians are human.

      Average person + anonymity = fucktard.
      Average person + power = nazi monster.

      Welcome to the Internet.

    • by GFree ( 853379 ) on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @11:05PM (#18967747)
      How does one guy on a Stargate forum constitute a "large portion of the Australia online population"?

      I'm Australian, and as far as I'm aware we hate censorship as much as anyone else. Don't generalise.
      • It wasn't just one. There was one main one and a couple of "me too's"
    • ... there seems to be a large portion of their online population who are big on censorship. At one point I was a very active member on a Stargate message board, but ther was an Aussie admin who was constantly closing threads ...

      That's not censorship: it's moderation. Censorship is done by governments. For TFA at hand, it is actually censorship because the Australian school board (presumeably run by the government) is blocking the site and they also want the Federal Government to take down the site (tho

  • Support? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ktappe ( 747125 ) on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @11:11PM (#18967799)
    It's interesting that their primary response is to shoot the messenger instead of listening to the message. We're not hearing from the teachers and administrators who get the highest marks on the website, are we? Just the bad ones who are trying to save their jobs not by improving but through censorship.

    As a side note, it's also interesting that the first two posts in response to this story seemed to advocate the censorship instead of considering whether the "defamed" teachers might in fact be unfit. Are Aussies really that OK with censorship?

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by o2sd ( 1002888 )
      As a side note, it's also interesting that the first two posts in response to this story seemed to advocate the censorship instead of considering whether the "defamed" teachers might in fact be unfit.

      Unfortunately, the quality of teachers has decreased markedly in the last 10-15 years in Australia. This is simply because, like every other profession that requires skill or knowledge or competence, there has been a diaspora of excellent teachers to the UK, the USoA, Europe and Asia.

      Of those teachers that took
      • Re:Support? (Score:5, Interesting)

        by femto ( 459605 ) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @12:36AM (#18968411) Homepage
        That's overstating the facts. Each week there are a couple of slots set aside for religious education in public schools. Each religion is responsible for providing its own teachers for that time. Children attend the class of choice, and have the freedom to do a non-religious activity during that time. It's a good system. Freedom of religion includes the freedom to be religious as well as the freedom not to participate in religion.
        • Yes, that religious flexibility is good. However, that's actually not the freedom of the children but the parents. If you tell the school that your 7-year old child is a devout Roman Catholic, (s)he will be ushered to the relevant religious classroom, no matter what (s)he thinks. Mind you, you can also tell them that you don't care. My kid went to some catholic thing for a while, found it way too rigid, went to the unitarians for some as he found the teacher more interesting and responsive and at the end de
          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by NoMaster ( 142776 )

            If you tell the school that your 7-year old child is a devout Roman Catholic, (s)he will be ushered to the relevant religious classroom, no matter what (s)he thinks.

            Really? Where? Because that wasn't my experience 20+ years ago, and it wasn't the experience of the 20-odd school leavers I just asked (I'm sitting my uni tute group at the moment - gotta love campus-wide wireless access ;-). The ones from the state schools tell me that, although they were nominally allocated to one demonination or another acc

      • by drsmithy ( 35869 )

        For example, many Americans would be outraged to learn that scripture is being taught in Australian Public Schools.

        Which ones ? Maybe things have changed in the last 15 years, but back when I was at school, "Religious Education" offered a choice of faiths *and* allowed for those wanted to opt-out and use it as free time.

        I personally find this highly offensive, and it makes me long for a US style constitution that guarantees separation of church (blech) and State.

        We do (in this context). The Australia

    • I'm an aussie, and I don't see any of this censorship. In fact, many people I know are appalled by the censorship in american society (watch an episode of mythbusters if you don't believe me - look at how many often they blur things out and play sound bites over swear words), especially given how enamoured the US is to it's beloved constitution/free speech/etc. Given that Australia has no guaranteed free speech, and aren't typically as ridiculously overpassionate about FREE SPEECH as America (despite storie
      • "Free speech" in America means that the government shouldn't prevent you from saying anything. Corporations are permitted to wipe out swear words and pixilate overly sexy photos and unplaced product logos as they see fit--and they run the TV stations.
        I suppose a case could be argued that the FCC as currently run violates free speech on televised presses. But when schools try to ban non-religious books, there is usually an outcry.
  • Insightful? (Score:3, Funny)

    by PC-PHIX ( 888080 ) * <jonathan&pcphix,com> on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @11:11PM (#18967803) Homepage

    Now the story has hit the media, with some insightful quotes such as "The president of the NSW Secondary Principals Council, Jim McAlpine, said the Federal Government should block access to 'scurrilous American websites'."

    Who the hell modded that insightful?

    How about (-1) flamebait instead?

    • Naw, -1 Strange Aussie Word Us Americans Can't Be Bothered To Look Up Or Understand would be a better mod for it.

      And it's the media man, you know, the ones who mod Jack Thompson +100,000 Insightful/Interesting/Genius when he manages to find a link between the VA shooting and Video Games before the killer's identity is released...what do you expect?
    • Just because that's a really good word, and also absolutely applicable to the story as a whole.

  • by jddj ( 1085169 ) on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @11:13PM (#18967817) Journal
    We'll just post the defamatory content in hexadecimal poems and songs on You Tube!
  • by plasmacutter ( 901737 ) on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @11:14PM (#18967823)
    Teaching is one of very few services whose practitioners are hard to gage until it's too late.

    Now you know who sucks, and therefore who to avoid.

    I'm sure the ones that suck are really ticked about this.
    • by dbIII ( 701233 )

      Teaching is one of very few services whose practitioners are hard to gage until it's too late.

      Your english teacher hasn't done a good job from reading that sentence - however in US english it is perfectly correct (yes - spelling and grammar correction on this forum is a stupid idea - it's a lame joke to call attention to that).

      Now you know who sucks, and therefore who to avoid.

      Australian teachers who do that to their students usually end up in jail - however they have been known to end up as right wing ta

  • Not Fair (Score:2, Funny)

    by Triggsie ( 763140 )
    Where was this site when I was at school. I would have loved to issue a report card on some of my teachers.
  • by Bewbewbew ( 871127 ) on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @11:20PM (#18967863) Homepage
    The quotes about the anonymous principal, in the article? Yeah, I went to that school, she was principal back then, and the comments are 100% spot on. Funny that she'd find her way into the SMH and onto Slashdot ...
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @11:22PM (#18967881)
    I'm an Aussie myself and I'm entirely not surprised. A lot of Australians are well-meaning but conservative, especially the older ones in office - their kneejerk reaction to a situation is to try to make it go away, rather than address the underlying issues.

    It is my hope that websites like this will encourage quality teaching and improvement in teacher training/practice, but a lot of people think it's better to brush it under the carpet rather than do the hard yards to satisfy the students.

    That said, there's no excuse for spreading falsehoods about teachers who don't deserve it. I really don't rate students to give fairly assess the short-comings of someone who just assigned them homework.
    • by Lurks ( 526137 )
      As an Australia that's lived the last ten years in the UK, I can categorically tell you that Australians whinge more and about more trivial things than the Poms do. In fact I find it quite remarkable what aussies can whinge about.
    • by Kokuyo ( 549451 )
      You'd be surprised.

      I remember when I went to school, we came across one or two of those teachers I'd call unfit to participate in society. Interestingly enough, those along with those who didn't know shiot about the subject they taught (another interesting fact: it happened quite often that when either of the statements were true, the other wasn't that far off either...) were the only ones to catch serious flack from students.

      Of course students don't like homework... but most of them aren't inherently stupi
  • by Greego ( 698947 ) on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @11:26PM (#18967927)
    ... what a fucking joke. Look, I can understand that the teachers feel they are being defamed - they certainly are - but some of the quotes illustrate why this is just an emotional reaction:

    (From TFA) "It is clearly an absolute disgrace that people are anonymously able to make comments about teachers that are quite atrocious," she said.

    So what? Why should someone's anonymous statement on some website mean anything to these teachers? Can't they just ignore it?

    The quote from Jim McAlpine at the end of the article is an absolute disgrace and shows that he is completely out of touch with internet governance, or lack-thereof.

    I'm sure Slashdotters will make plenty of disparaging comments towards Australians but this comes down to an irrational, emotional reaction by a small bunch of luddite fuckwits who should know better.
    • Exactly. If the teachers had their smarts about them they would start posting ridiculously positive grades about each other. Just to prove how stupid and unverifiable the system is.
  • Sounds about right. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by CaptainDefragged ( 939505 ) on Wednesday May 02, 2007 @11:32PM (#18967971)
    As with many stories, there is more to this than meets the eye.
    The NSW Teachers Federation, which is a fairly powerful union here, has been vigorously fighting any attempts to rate the teachers performance and that of their students. Report cards for students are virtually meaningless nowdays and they have fought tooth and nail to prevent the return of the old system. I can't see what justification the Dept of Education has for blocking access to these sites, but as someone who went through the NSW system, I think having a rating site is a great idea. Many of the teachers are less than competent to be teaching our children.
    • by ashridah ( 72567 )
      I can't see what justification the Dept of Education has for blocking access to these sites

      The thing is, you'll generally find that the blocklists are controlled by individual schools, *not* by the department of education, so any tin-god principal can go on a rampage blocking sites
      (or turn around and turn it off when someone complains that they can't do their report on 'breast cancer' (why is that always the search that people reference btw? personally, i use one filter blocking it's own FAQ page because th
      • you'll generally find that the blocklists are controlled by individual schools, *not* by the department of education

        Just checked... Department of Education and Training has centrally blocked the site for all 700 odd Western Australian government schools.
        • by ashridah ( 72567 )
          Things have changed since my day then. Work i did in Victoria and just across the border in NSW had me installing school-administrated content blocking. Of course, it's entirely possible that stuff like VicOne and equivalent for NSW have made that more centralized.

          Understandable, of course, since local-to-school IT staff assume the block will 'just work' and not need constant attention.
  • "Will no one rid me of this troublesome network?"
  • In some ways, this isn't that different than students talking behind the teachers backs. At least this way the teachers can find out what the students are saying about them.
  • Free speech (Score:5, Insightful)

    by wall0159 ( 881759 ) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @12:00AM (#18968177)
    Many people favour free speech. Fewer support it when people say things they don't like.

    It happens on slashdot too - look how people abuse the moderation system to supress opinions with which they disagree..
    • You're confusing your ability to write what you want with my ability to call you an idiot when I read your opinion.
      • Re:Free speech (Score:5, Insightful)

        by wall0159 ( 881759 ) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @12:30AM (#18968383)
        "You're confusing your ability to write what you want with my ability to call you an idiot when I read your opinion."

        No I'm not. As I said, people use "offtopic" and "troll" moderators to (effectively) remove posts with which they disagree. This is not what the moderation scheme is for - it's intended to reduce the incidence of trolling, abusive posts, etc. Modding down a legitamate post just because you disagree with it is really a form of censorship.

        You're an idiot. ;-)
    • by OldManAndTheC++ ( 723450 ) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @01:01AM (#18968577)
      The Muse of Irony demands it!
  • Our scurrilous [m-w.com] websites? Your fucking kids wrote the stuff!

    -Peter
  • .... how many teachers who really aren't that good (owing perhaps to inexperience) and actually got good reviews on the site? Are they bitching about how libellous the site is?

    No?

    Then maybe... just maybe... the site isn't libellous at all.

  • the main issues seem to be that ANYONE can post, there is no moderation and no right of reply. Sure you can say what you want but the target should also have the right to challenge the 'ratings'
    • by ross.w ( 87751 )
      If you RTFWS you would see that they do offer teachers a right of reply.
    • by pbjones ( 315127 )
      a/ it's about people making comments about people.

      b/ my bad, I was told, and it's being reported, that there was no right of reply to any comment recorded.
  • We've had the exact same thing for our teachers at Virginia Tech [ratevtteachers.com] for years.
  • stupid... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by advocate_one ( 662832 ) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @01:51AM (#18968857)
    the teachers involved should sue the websites to get the identities and then sue the posters...

    oh wait... that costs money and takes time...

    what else could we do... Ah I know... get our union to get the government to block them instead...

    la la la la la la... I see no problem.... la la la la la....
  • Critical thinking (Score:5, Interesting)

    by paylett ( 553168 ) on Thursday May 03, 2007 @03:57AM (#18969557)
    (If it were technically possible,) how would you react to a website where anyone (including potential employers) could search for you and see what your average bug count per 100 lines of code was?
  • I've been rated (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 03, 2007 @05:45AM (#18970069)
    I'm a teacher in New Zealand and many of the schools here in NZ are listed on this site. I think this site is actually beneficial. Most on the comments on there are positive and constructive. Some are not. I think the moderators do a reasonable job removing imature slander etc. Anyway I think it's cool but then i would say that because my feedback so far has been sweet! If i had negative feedback on there then it might give me a hint that i might need to change my teaching practice.

"Why should we subsidize intellectual curiosity?" -Ronald Reagan

Working...