;)
tagged: Australian, child exploitation, child protection, Daily Telegraph, firewall, internet censorship, internet filter, internet filter DOCS, Kevin Rudd, Labor Party, OCSET, rabbit proof firewall, Stephen Conroy, web censorship, web filterRabbit Proof Farce/Firewall: Krudd diverts child protection funds to net censorship
Posted by Claire Connelly in Media, Politics, Technology
As Krudd dis-empowers child protection agencies nationwide, diverting their much needed funds to internet censorship, the truth is far more disturbing than I could have possibly imagined.
The Australian Federal Police Online Child Sexual Exploitation Team (OCSET) has lost $2.8 million of its budget to the “Rabbit Proof Firewall.”
Though some may argue that $2.8 million is a small sum, with a yearly budget of only $7.5 million, the loss is significant.
OCSET is losing exactly one third of their annual budget to The Great Australian Firewall, get this – in the name of child protection.
The irony is both rife and disturbing.
Even before this budget cut, a meager $7.5 million a year in funding is appalling; it is yet another clear indication of how seriously the Krudd government takes child protection.
Without those essential funds, OCSET simply will not have enough staff to investigate the pedophiles they already know about, let alone the ones that haven’t been caught yet.
While some cases will be palmed off to the US (whose authorities do not have the same training and experience as OCSET, let alone jurisdiction), “only half are likely to be investigated by child protection police,” reported the Daily Telegraph, “the rest will be farmed out to local commands or dropped.”
So let me get this straight, in the name of child protection, Krudd has created a situation where pedophiles can get away with known crimes because the funds that were dedicated to pursuing them has been spent on internet censorship?
This scheme is an absolute farce.
Minister for Broadband, Communications, and the Digital Economy – Stephen Conroy, the same guy who emphasized that a high speed network is essential for a competitive economy, (ABC Insiders 10 June 2007), is now taking money away from child protection organisations to fund a firewall that that won’t work and will also slow broadband networks by up to 87%.
This is absolutely unforgivable.
This gross misallocation of funds will only serve to further endanger the lives of children both on and offline.
Wouldn’t the real objectives of child protection be better achieved by reallocating the $44 million for the Rabbit Proof Farce/Firewall to OCSET?
Imagine what good child protection agencies could do if our government actually took child protection seriously.
Why is the Australian public allowing this to happen?
Author and Professor of Sociology Barry Glassner believes it is being caused by what he calls “the fear industrial complex.”
“The fear industrial complex is composed of politicians, activist groups and corporations that all sell us on the idea that they can provide safety from the very dangers they are scaring us about,” says Glassner.
“Whenever somebody’s trying to scare us, the question to ask is ‘are they benefiting from it, and in what way?’”
The US Internet Safety Technical Task Force released a report which discovered that the internet does not significantly increase the risk of exposure to child sexual abuse.
The panel of researchers included leading internet experts, internet service providers, technology development experts, social networking sites, academia, education, and child safety and public policy advocacy organizations, and was organised by 50 state Attorneys General to tackle the problem of children being solicited for sex online.
The report revealed that though the internet increases the availability of harmful, problematic , and illegal content, it does not necessarily increase minors’ exposure.
It showed that the incidences of unwanted exposure to pornography are minimal and those most likely to be exposed are those that are seeking it out, such as older male minors.
The New York Times reported that “in the cases that do exist, the report said, teenagers are typically willing participants and are already at risk because of poor home environments, substance abuse or other problems.”
Colin Jacobs from Electronic Frontiers Australia went through the report in detail and agrees that “filtering won’t deliver for Aussie kids:”
“The research shows that the dangers of online activity are grossly exaggerated,” says Jacobs.
“Where risks do exist, they stem from interactions with other people, not from exposure to unwanted web pages.
An automated filter, no matter how expensive, cannot help mitigate these risks, only education and supervision will do.”
It revealed that the internet has facilitated and led to the increase of both on and offline bullying, which poses a far more serious challenge than the sexual solicitation of minors by adults.
From this we can only conclude that the Krudd Government’s plan for internet censorship has little to do with child protection and everything to do with limiting free speech.
If the Krudd government were really serious about protecting children from sexual abuse, they wouldn’t be taking urgently needed funds away from the very people who are employed to prevent it.
;)
;)
;)
