The latest weekly Morgan face-to-face poll has Labor shedding another two points on the primary vote – down over the last three surveys from 42 per cent to 40 per cent to 38 per cent – and the dividend again being picked up by the Greens, who have gone from 8.5 per cent to 11 per cent to 13 per cent. The Coalition is down half a point to 41 per cent. As a result there is only a slight change on the two-party vote, with Labor’s lead down from 52-48 to 51.5-48.5. There seems to be an anomaly with the “others” rating, which has supposedly jerked up from an anomalous 2 per cent to 6.5 per cent. The fact that last week’s figures only add up to 97 per cent probably has something to do with this.
Elsewhere:
• New South Wales Labor is bracing itself for tomorrow’s Penrith by-election, which you can discuss here. Tune into this site from 6pm tomorrow for live coverage.
• The Senate passed legislation yesterday that will allow pre-poll votes cast within the relevant electorate to be treated as ordinary rather than declaration votes, and thus to be admitted to the count on election night. This will account for about 4500 votes per electorate – roughly 5 per cent of the total. Nearly 20 per cent of the votes cast in 2007 were declaration votes of various kinds, slightly under half of which were pre-polls. The bill also allows changes to enrolment to be made online, and will prevent a repeat of the Christian Democratic Party’s effort from last year’s Bradfield by-election where it fielded nine candidates without having to go to the bother of obtaining the 50 supporting signatures required of independent candidates.
• Wyong councillor John McNamara has been chosen as the new Liberal candidate for Dobell. The nomination had been vacated by the withdrawal of original nominee Garry Lee, who seems to have been pushed because his establishment of a company to take advantage of the government’s insulation scheme threatened to muddy the election campaign waters. VexNews published a colourful account from a local Liberal who tipped the outcome earlier in the week, which suggested the party does not fancy its chances in the seat.
• The Queensland Times has published a list of eight starters for the June 27 Liberal National Party preselection in the new seat of Wright, to be held following the disendorsement of Hajnal Ban. Not included are the previously discussed Bill O’Chee and Ted Shepherd. Former Blair MP Cameron Thompson appears to be the front-runner, the others being Scott Buchholz, chief-of-staff to Senator Barnaby Joyce; Richard Hackett-Jones, “a long-term tax-review campaigner who helms the Revenue Review Foundation which advocates for a uniform rate of income tax”; Bob La Castra, Gold Coast councillor and perennial preselection bridesmaid; David Neuendorf, a Lockyer councillor; Scott White, an aircraft engineer; and the unheralded Erin Kerr and Jonathan Krause.
• Yet more trouble for the Liberal National Party, with the Courier-Mail reporting local members are calling for Forde candidate Bert van Manen to be disendorsed because “he had not kept his promise to fund his own election”. While van Manen was reckoned safe for the time being, “sources admitted there had been problems and his position might come under scrutiny if there were any further issues”.
• The Liberal National Party has preselected Logan councillor Luke Smith to run against Craig Emerson in the safe Labor southern Brisbane seat of Rankin.
• The Illawarra Mercury reports former rugby league player David Boyle will withdraw as Labor candidate for the winnable south coast New South Wales seat of Gilmore, after his installation by the national executive caused an uproar in local party branches.
• Following the withdrawal of original nominee Tania Murdock, the Nationals will preselect a new candidate tomorrow for the Labor-held north coast New South Wales seat of Richmond. The preselection has attracted four candidates, an interesting turnaround on the first round when Murdock was the only person interested. According to Alex Easton of The Northern Star, the nominees are “Richmond Nationals president Alan Hunter and lawyer Jim Fuggle from the south of the electorate; and businessman Phil Taylor and pharmacist Brian Curran from the seat’s north”. Oddly, Hunter was quoted on Wednesday saying “party members would not automatically appoint a candidate if there were no stand-out nominations”, with suggestions the one-time Anthony family stronghold should be left to the Liberals.
• The Tasmanian Liberals are hawking internal polling which it says shows Labor in trouble in as many three seats, although the only figure provided – a 37 per cent primary vote tie in Bass, which would translate to a comfortable win for Labor – doesn’t bear this out. The other two seats are Braddon and, it seems, Lyons. Barnaby Joyce has today been talking of a Queensland hit-list consisting of Leichhardt, Dawson, Flynn, Longman and Wright (a slightly creative inclusion given it’s a notionally LNP new seat), with Forde as a roughie.
• Left faction powerbroker and state party assistant secretary Luke Foley has taken the place of Ian Macdonald in the New South Wales Legislative Council, following the latter’s resignation after an adverse review finding into travel expenses.
Adam, your argument is starting to sound like Apartheid era South Africa where they didn’t have TV until 1975 because they couldn’t work out how to stop black people watching it. Finally, they gave up and brought in television.
Rosa #109
Thats a bit like asking why don’t green voters that preference ALP go straight across to the ALP?
I’m most interested in Black’s idea because I have been for most of my life a centre-right, leberal voter with green tendencies. I wish there was more of me
No 143
I’m not afraid. I will have a VPN in place to circumvent any site the Government wishes me not to see.
Received this by email today and thought it may be of interest and worth circulating.
“The facts about the proposed Rudd Labor Government mining super profits tax:
If the price of iron ore in 2004 was $100 a tonne, today it is $600 a tonne.
If the price of hard coking coal in 2004 was $100, today it is $400 a tonne.&&[i]
If the cost of labour in the mining industry in 2004 was 100, today it is just 127.
Labour makes up 15 per cent of costs in the mining industry. Fuel and machinery costs have also increased in these last five years, but again, nothing like the prices gained.
In 2004 the iron ore export industry and the coking coal export industries were enjoying huge profits.
So today they are enjoying profits beyond their wildest dreams – because costs may have also increased in these last six years, but nothing like the prices. For example, BHP Billiton alone declared a profit of $10.7 billion in 2009, and predicts a profit of $23.5 billion in 2011.
The mining bosses are going berserk at the Rudd Labor government – which has been very friendly to them – because they see this super-profits tax concept in Australia as the start of a global move by governments to increase the public share in the global minerals boom.
It is a global conflict between huge mining corporations like BHP-Billiton, Rio Tinto and Xstrata on the one hand, and hundreds of millions of people in mineral rich regions in Asia, Africa, Latin America and Australia.
· Norway has a super-profit tax of 78 per cent – and the multinationals pay.
· Chile- the largest copper producer – is proposing a new mining tax to take an extra $12 billion this year. BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto, Xstrata and Anglo-American are investing $48 billion there to 2017.
· Brazil – the largest iron ore producer – is planning a bigger tax take from mining.
· India is proposing a windfall profits tax on non-fuel resources.&&[ii]
GLOBAL SOCIAL JUSTICE – WHICH SIDE ARE YOU ON?
Unless all the progressive organisations and movements support the Labor government’s proposed mining super-profits tax, the mining companies, who have now won the support of the top 100 multinational corporations in the Business Council of Australia, will force the government to back down. This would be both a global and a local defeat for working people, which we cannot afford.
This puts Australia in the front line of a global struggle for social justice and human rights. If we can unite, and seize this moment, we can make a difference. The predictable failure of the Rudd Labor Government to build popular support for this measure is no excuse for the Left and Labour movements to sit on its hands in the face aggressive corporate attack on a progressive measure.
Yes, the mining export companies have paid a lot of tax in absolute terms in the last decade, but they have continued to pay state mining royalties set for an earlier period when iron ore and coal prices were much lower, and profit margins thinner.
This was a gift from the Howard government which also made sure that mining companies could impose individual contracts on their workers, minimise any land rights and native title claims that they might have to deal with, and scuttle any serious action on carbon pollution of the climate.
The mining super profits of recent years are first of all taken from the lands of indigenous Australians, and in the second sense, taken from us all, because they cannot be renewed. The Mining Super-Profits Tax will give back a share of the windfall that giant mining companies are reaping to the people who own the minerals in the first place.
The Rudd Labor proposal is positive but quite moderate:
· The government refunds to mining companies 30 per cent of their exploration costs
· Mining companies pay state royalties based on the volume of minerals extracted, not on profits
· “Super Profits” are defined as the profits after deduction of operating costs, cost of capital and a modest profit defined by a 10-year bond rate, and these super-profits are taxed at 40 per cent, instead of the current 30 per cent company tax rate.
· One-third of the super profits tax goes to an infrastructure fund mainly to be spent to help the mining industry.
· Another part of the super-profit tax repays the mining companies for the royalties they have paid to the states.
· The remainder of the super-profit tax will go to the federal budget and some of it will be used to increase superannuation contributions from 9 per cent of wages to 12 per cent, and some will be used to reduce the normal company tax rate from 30 per cent to 28 per cent.
In other words, the Rudd Labor government is giving most of the benefits to the super-profit tax to the mining industry and to all other businesses, and the remainder to working families.
But it is no surprise that the global mining bosses are treating this moderate concept like toilet paper.
· They won concessions from the Rudd Labor Government on the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, which rendered it useless and not worth pursuing when it came to the Senate. The subsequent abandonment of the CPRS has undermined the Rudd Labor Government’s credibility with the electorate.
· They won concessions from Rudd and Gillard prior to the 2007 election so that AWAs would continue until 2013 and the new Fair Work Act would retain a “strong (anti-union) cop on the beat”.
· They opposed national land rights laws in the 1980s and Native Title in the 1990s.
· After the global capitalist crisis struck in late 2008, the Australian mining companies sacked 15.2% of their workforce in the first six months of 2009 (20,500 people) without blinking&&[iii]. This was despite the mining sector increasing its total income by 34.7 per cent ($47.2 billion) that year – the largest increase of any industry sector that year&&[iv].
Now they threaten to ‘go on strike’ against a policy which will help most Australians who have to pay their taxes regardless of their income. But under the Fair Work Act if workers ‘go on strike’ without approval they are treated as criminals, and can be fined and jailed.
The mining companies are ruthlessly using workers’ jobs as a scare tactic in the political game. The CFMEU Mining & Energy Division, the union for many mining workers, is standing up to this bullying, and so should all unions.
The myths
· The big mining companies ‘care about all Australians’ – yet most of their shareholders live overseas. The two most powerful mining bosses are South African Marius Kloppers and US citizen Tom Albanese, who between them are paid $19.7 million this year. They care about themselves and their shareholders.
· The super-profits tax is ‘retrospective’. Actually the tax is not on profits from years past, but would begin in 2012. The mining companies are objecting to any change in taxes.
· The super-profit tax makes Australia the most risky place to invest. Sure – worse than the Congo, Madagascar, Zimbabwe …
These mining companies are opposed to the Australian parliament making a law that they don’t like, but they rely on government support for all their operations. They should be forced to accept our democracy – or perhaps they should really be nationalised – which the hysterical Andrew Forrest of Fortescue Metals has been claiming the new super profits tax is doing now.
There is no sector more worthy of expropriation in the public interest than mining companies who cheat and manipulate using their huge wealth to resist social and environmental accountability. This demand should be raised against the increasing hysteria being whipped up by the mining bosses.
Improve the mining super-profits tax
The Rudd Labor government should explicitly:
· commit a portion of the super-profits tax to the indigenous people of the lands where the minerals are extracted, and to all indigenous people through their own community organisations.
· commit another portion of the super-profits tax to the mining communities who have to live through the pressures associated with delivering the enormous wealth from mining today, so that their often deteriorating facilities can be lifted to national standards.
· abandon the cut in company tax to 28 per cent.”
SEARCH Foundation, June 9, 2010
[When I hear people commenting that they would like an Internet filter to protect their grandchildren, I wonder why, if they are so concerned, they have not installed one of the plethora of software solutions that are already available. Why is it the government’s responsibility to do so?]
they have one
[Any Government which wishes to place a clamp on the Internet is afraid of the Internet. It is afraid of not having control.]
So GP is an anarchist now. I’m glad we’ve cleared that up. Have you told David Clarke this?
Generic Person@153
oes include a filter introduced by an Abbott Coalition Govt – they’re not saying anything yet, and despite Hockey’s frothing against one – it WILL happen, and it will cover ALL forms of pornography – not just RC Material – Alston tried, and failed – Abbott will suceed.
Adam, it is much easier to control and classify the limited channels of mainstream media. TV classification is a given so I hadn’t considered it. However, there is a difference from what you are ‘given’ in the mainstream media (TV, radio, newspapers) and what you ‘seek’ on the internet. Monitoring children in the ‘seeking’ what was what I getting at.
Talking about clamping the internet…
WTF is going on here people!!!!
[US President Barack Obama would be granted powers to seize control of and even shut down the internet under a new bill that describes the global internet as a US “national asset”.
Local lobby groups and academics have rounded on the plan, saying that, rather than combat terrorists, it would actually do them “the biggest favour ever” by terrorising the rest of the world, which is now heavily reliant on cyberspace.]
http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/obama-internet-kill-switch-proposed-20100618-yln6.html?autostart=1
It’s no surprise that douche-bag Lieberman is behind it. 🙁
Aristotle – #126
Thanks for that – I had been dismissing the last Neislon as an outlier, but maybe I should take it more seriously.
IN case anyone would like to see what 53/47 to the L-NP would look like, here is Our Lord Anthony Green’s swing-o-meter.
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2010/calculator/?swing=national&national=-5.7&nsw=0&vic=0&qld=0&wa=0&sa=0&tas=0&act=0&nt=0&retiringfactor=1
29 Seats gained: Chilling stuff, hey labor voters?
No 157
Abbott doesn’t appear to understand it, so he’s not saying much. I’m not overly impressed with the Liberal non-position on this issue, but suffice to say I will remain opposed to it even if a Liberal government attempts to impose a mandatory filter.
Mind you, had Conroy stuck to his promise of having a clean-feed which one could either opt in or out of, there would be no drama.
BigBob
There maybe a few surprises with the RSPT. I had some customers today that are from Chinchilla. We got onto the subject of mining & the episode on 60 minutes with the gas drilling, re; Darling Downs, Chinchilla etc……
They told me there is a groundswell against the mining industry in the rural communities & the action groups against mining are growing in strength, which is quite out of the ordinary for these traditional conservative communities.
Especially after Barnacle was campaigning hard in these seats, told the audiences that mining tax is way, way too little. He also slammed their lack of input into local communities. But….then……..Rudd announced the RSPT & Barnacle starting singing another tune. A complete about face.
Surely people are not so stupid???????
geezlouise,
Do you think (Conroy’s) filter will be ineffective, or a threat to freedom? I don’t see that it can be both.
Why don’t the anti-filter crowd focus their attacks on the whole Classification system instead? I understand that it is a dreadfully inconsistent & subjective operation, ridden with unexplained restrictions and/or exceptions. The Classification system is what the filter would be part of.
If it is bad to so restrict the net, then how can it be acceptable to equally restrict print, radio, television etc (especially since the other media are so much more easily controlled by the Classification system)?
If you knock over the whole Classification system, then your problem with the filter automatically fades away. I think that many people who would be happy to oppose the filter hang back because they just can’t see why the net should have its own set of rules. If the net’s current rules are alright by you, then demand they be applied across the board to all!
[ So you’re in favour of the abolition of the classification system for TV? You’re happy with Teenage Cum Whores II screening at 5pm? ]
That’s a straw man, there are methods any half technically savvy person can use to prevent children from accessing inappropriate material, adequate supervision not least of all. A clean feed is a good idea, just give me the choice and don’t force it down my neck because you feel the right to technical ignorance is more important that the right to self reliance. After all current commercial TV is really just clean feed and one has the option to opt out with adult cable tv right?
[If Rudd had ever really intended to take real action then in his very first year he would have:
* started to reduce fuel subsidies
* started to reduce company car subsidies
* started a massive upgrade to public transport
* ended old growth logging
* started massive renewable energy funding
* enacted european style efficiency standards for equipment and housing
and I could go on. Rudd did none of the above, and still has not started.
And note that all of the above does not include an ETS or carbon tax which is of course another necessary step.]
Agree with all those, but they’re all going to be politically hard going.
[started to reduce fuel subsidies]
Might get away with this one as it principally affects a non-Labor voting demographic. However, there will be a general flow on effect on cost of living. Would have to be very gradual.
[started to reduce company car subsidies]
An awful lot of people in the mortgage belt (ie where elections are won and lost) are going to get very miffed indeed if they lose their company car and associated perks.
[started a massive upgrade to public transport]
How? Metropolitan PT is a State responsibility. Even so, ISTR there was money for PT in the stimulus package, although NSW missed out because they’re so useless.
[ended old growth logging]
Two words. Mark Latham.
[started massive renewable energy funding]
Yes, agree. I think the clean coal bollocks is a mistake.
[enacted european style efficiency standards for equipment and housing]
Yes, Australian standards in this regard are appalling and at least 40 years behind the UK, let alone mainland Europe. However, watch that mortgage belt suburban vote plummet if you suddenly tell people they can’t have a 250m2 4×2 built for $100,000 (or whatever, I haven’t looked lately). At least the insulation scheme was a nod in this direction.
[And note that all of the above does not include an ETS or carbon tax which is of course another necessary step.]
I’ve got this vague memory of the government putting their major CC effort into developing a piece of legislation being developed over a lengthy period before being voted down in the Senate by most of a traitorous opposition. There was a minor party who could have got it through under the circumstances but didn’t. Yes, yes, I’ve heard the phrase
“Locks in failure” but I’ve seen some very plausible explanations of why it didn’t. More plausible than those I’ve seen as to why it would have, anyway. Looked like a fit of pique to me.
I actually think that the Australian people can be brought around to acept all these and more, but we’re so used to having a luxurious standard of living at bargain basement prices that doing so is going to be akin to turning a supertanker around with a length of clothesline. You can do it, but only imperceptibly slowly.
[Adam, it is much easier to control and classify the limited channels of mainstream media. ]
Again, that’s irrelevant to the point of principle.
[Monitoring children in the ’seeking’ what was what I getting at.]
It’s NOT all about children. There are perfectly legitimate reasons to restrict certain things from access by adults too. Are you in favour of your local cinema showing Let’s Kill All the Niggers, provided it’s given an AO rating?
No 158
Quite correct. Almost all nefarious content on the Internet is actively sought. So if the aim is to stop paedophiles, they will simply seek a VPN solution. The filter will not stop this from happening regardless of Conroy’s pernicious hysterics.
No 165
Another excellent post.
161 Aristotle
[Posted Friday, June 18, 2010 at 6:07 pm | Permalink
Now, which pollster does their 2PP based on what people say and not how they voted last time?
Morgan and Nielsen do both, Newspoll and Galaxy do as per the last election. Although Nielsen only asks minor party voters for their leaning, whereas Morgan gets them to actually nominate.]
161
HAVING A lend of yourself are we
[I don’t know how I can express the level of loathing and disgust that I feel towards both PB’s resident far right wing-nut and our loopy Greens visitor with the gutter slime comments directed towards a lovely, caring person who’s only crime it appears is to be the spouse of the PM.
Fellows, this lady in “NOT” a politician, but a private citizen who has done “NO” wrong and does not deserve to be used in a low, partisan attack on her or her character by anyone, let alone tow low life bloggers.
You’re both disgusting!]
Scorpio, a search on the word “Hyacinth” in the comments archive turned up a number of comments made by yourself with respect to our erstwhile First Lady which were uniformly derogatory, and in several cases plainly defamatory.
we can all play with anthonys barometer if we want to
so
[Are you in favour of your local cinema showing Let’s Kill All the Niggers, provided it’s given an AO rating?]
Never seen it myself, but I understand this to be the basic premise of D.W. Griffith’s seminal 1915 masterpiece Birth of a Nation.
Conroys view is all part of the ‘Drink your Kool Aid and go and lie down, papa knows best’ attitude of this government. There is a serious authoritarian streak that permeates from the top down and goes through almost everything they do and the way they approach issues. It is their modus operandi and they don;t know quite what to do when their bluff is called. The Miners standing up and defying the authority figure as forced the issue like no other. It is a bit like the teenage child of the strictly religious family coming home are saying they are gay – Dad is left angry, bewildered and confused – just like someone else right now.
[ Are you in favour of your local cinema showing Let’s Kill All the Niggers, ]
Again, specious argument, that would be inciting racial violence. That is illegal regardless of censorship classification. You make a good point though, just that it is counter to what you’re trying to argue.
[Finns – I thought Ruud Gullit was the most likely to take over.]
Diog, you bloody iDIOGt. i said no more of the same old Dutch Rijsttafel sambal.
[Scorpio, a search on the word “Hyacinth” in the comments archive turned up a number of comments made by yourself with respect to our erstwhile First Lady which were uniformly derogatory, and in several cases plainly defamatory]
william come on people called my mother Hyacinth and she thought it was a compliment she was a very proud lady who dressed very old fashioned
you are old fashioned and its like comparing ice to hot coal
sorry cannot agree with you one little bit.
[Ossie Ardiles would be perfect – except for the team he played for in the UK.]
Ru – wash your mouth out!
My Say, the comments did not end with him calling her the name.
No 167
Yes, if I want to see a film about racism or which actively indulges in racism, that is my prerogative. No, I’m not a racist, but as an intelligent adult male I think I can make my own decisions without Government imposing its morality on me.
If we close down all fossil fuel power stations then we could forget the internet filter. We would be looking for whale oil to light our lamps.
[There maybe a few surprises with the RSPT. I had some customers today that are from Chinchilla. We got onto the subject of mining & the episode on 60 minutes with the gas drilling, re; Darling Downs, Chinchilla etc……]
i have seen a few documentries recently where country people have been very upset with mining companies.
there was on sbs about Paupua as well
GP fancies himself as a hard man of the Right, but debates like this show that he’s really just another Balmain basket-weaver. The inner city elite, whether “left” or “right”, is united in defence of its privileges. The Greens are emerging as the party of inner city elite privilege, so I expect that’s where GP will finish up eventually.
*Off for now*
[Scorpio, a search on the word “Hyacinth” in the comments archive turned up a number of comments made by yourself with respect to our erstwhile First Lady which were uniformly derogatory, and in several cases plainly defamatory.]
Bilbo, in the classical words of one John McEnroe: “You cant be serious”. Mrs. Hyacinth Bucket deserves all the bucketing she gets as the aqua weed.
hughb, re your comments on my actions for climate change.
One of the commitments at the G20 was for all countries to remove fuel subsidies. It will be interesting to see how Rudd moves on this. (Christine Milne wrote something for Crikey on this.)
Public transport is a state issue, but like many other state issues (roads, health, education) the federal government can allocate money for this purpose.
We are in agreement with many of the other points.
And the big one – the CPRS, time for some recreation for me so for tonight I’ll just agree to disagree on this.
William,
Scorpio did make this qualification:
so it should have been obvious that he was speaking of a completely different category of person to the one Jannette “You tell people things to get them to do things” Howard occupies…
“Are you in favour of your local cinema showing Let’s Kill All the Niggers”
If the local cinema owner thought that he could make a buck fine, though I wouldn’t be going and I wouldn’t have a high opinion of anybody going along either if the content was indicative of the title. I also would not object to said cinema being peacefully picketed for showing a film offensive to a large proportion of the population. No different to when films have been shown offensive to the religious right – it offends some people but they still have right to object.
K
[Fellows, this lady in “NOT” a politician, but a private citizen who has done “NO” wrong and does not deserve to be used in a low, partisan attack on her or her character by anyone, let alone tow low life bloggers.]
Which part of this sentence doesn’t apply equally to both wives?
[If it is bad to so restrict the net, then how can it be acceptable to equally restrict print, radio, television etc (especially since the other media are so much more easily controlled by the Classification system)?
If you knock over the whole Classification system, then your problem with the filter automatically fades away. I think that many people who would be happy to oppose the filter hang back because they just can’t see why the net should have its own set of rules. If the net’s current rules are alright by you, then demand they be applied across the board to all!]
Pretty much covers my view. A number of European countries have far more liberal censorship/classification regimes than Australia and have yet to degenerate into cesspools of debauchery, violence and sexual crime.
And, of course, the filter is likely to restrict a lot more than just porn. Something its advocates seem reluctant to address.
Therese moved from Brisbane to Canberra.
Janette moved from Wolstonecraft to Kirribilli.
The defence rests. 🙂
[Bilbo, in the classical words of one John McEnroe: “You cant be serious”. Mrs. Hyacinth Bucket deserves all the bucketing she gets as the aqua weed.]
I make no judgement on Mrs Howard’s desserts. However, if you’re of a mind to dump a bucket (bouquet?) on her, I suggest this disqualifies you from rhetoric of the “leave the man’s family out of it” variety, an overheated dish of which has just been served up by Scorpio.
Furthermore, McEnroe said “you cannot be serious”, an important rhetorical distinction.
[My Say, the comments did not end with him calling her the name]
sorry william i did not read it all just the hycthin bit, which i think is quite sweet really;’
did not read past that.
Diogenes,
As long as I don’t create legal problems here, I’m allowed to hate unequally 🙂
Kersebleptes @ 164
Ultimately I think the filter will be ineffective. It doesn’t take very much investigation to realise this. My interest lies with those who are aware of a filter’s limitations but support it anyway.
I think putting your effort into keeping the Internet free of censorship would be a more efficient approach to the democratisation of information than attempting a retro active assault on the classification system as it stands.
As for the rest of it you need a more thorough understanding of how the Internet is different from the traditional channels, at some point you have to realise that there is quite a difference between the TV model of five available choices and the Internet model of a billion choices.
[Never seen it myself, but I understand this to be the basic premise of D.W. Griffith’s seminal 1915 masterpiece Birth of a Nation.]
I watched that on Youtube and it was quite boring, the sound effects were awful
[I make no judgement on Mrs Howard’s desserts.]
Oh Bilbo, did i mention the Howards? i was talking about the TV series.
And one final word on the internet filter before I watch some telly.
The Government are now looking at forcing every ISP to keep a record of every URL you enter and this record must be kept for several years.
It is also very likely that the government will continue the trend of adding to the list of things that must be classified Refused Classification.
I fear that the record of what you looked at when some things are legal will one day be used to justify a search of your computer for what has since become Refused Classification material.
(At the moment owning certain RC material in Victoria is legal, but I think this is already not the case in one or two states.)
It is worth pointing out that already some of what is broadcast on TV in other countries (eg the UK) may be RC in Australia.
We are heading down a very slippery slope and I am fearful.
[As for the rest of it you need a more thorough understanding of how the Internet is different from the traditional channels, at some point you have to realise that there is quite a difference between the TV model of five available choices and the Internet model of a billion choices.]
You have to realise that the internet will provide all media. TV is dead. Newspapers are dead. Video rentals are dead. Bookstores are dead. Newsagents are dead. Cinemas are dead.
Govts, business and consumers worldwide are struggling to accept this.
If all you whizz bang computer nerds can circumvent the government internet filter then what are you bitching about?
My mistake, Finnigans. I am aware of the show’s premise, but no more.