No Illusions 04 – No Clean Feed

My first No Illusions podcast for 2010! Today I’m talking about the Australian Government’s “clean feed” with three guys who know a lot more about it than I do: Stephen Collins (@trib), Peter Black (@peterblackQUT) and Jim Stewart (@jimboot). This episode was recorded with a live studio audience. Well, okay, they weren’t in a studio, they were on my uStream channel, but I’ve always wanted to say that.

4 thoughts on “No Illusions 04 – No Clean Feed

    1. I don’t think it was an “anti-religion rant”. I’m just pointing out that the Christian lobby is making a move on the Australian political landscape and that the “clean feed” is just one of their tactics.

  1. Thanks for the podcast.

    I’m new to the topic. I appreciated the questions and criticisms you raised but some of your arguments were definitely more satisfying and logical than others.

    On one hand you argued against a “reasonable adult’s belief of what is moral and decent” as dangerously hazy, but then also suggested that censorship isn’t a black and white issue and trying to define what should and shouldnt be censored is dangerous? In that case if we assume censorship has any place in our society isn’t a less rigid criteria a better one?

    Using Bill Heffernons photos as an example, yes, some people may believe they are child porn but then there is child porn that is clearly just that. The line must always be drawn somewhere if we are going to define certain things as unwanted or criminal. That’s where the ongoing healthy argument functions and where the opinions of “reasonable” people change and evolve.

    I’m guessing though you are probably anti-censorship anyway. Censorship to my mind is just an extension of criminal law. Why outlaw drink driving for good reason, then allow people to distribute material with methods on how to mask blood alchohol levels.

    I can agree with you that of course the Christian Right have an agenda but I dont buy the slippery slope argument. It just happens that the Christian Right share a lot of the same concerns as most people on extreme and borderline criminal content. Even if they get the wedge in, I fail to see how not having been able to see some dodgy webpage is going to hamstring free thinkers if their time to try drive in the wedge comes.

    I’m open-minded and I dont disagree with you in principle; the arguments about mistakes and hacking are reasonable. I also agree that parent supervision is the real ticket. I guess bottom line is though if I dont want to look at those sites anyway, then what do I care? I think people will care if and when the goverment tried to draw the line more to the right, then you’d get the public backlash and I think youd find the slope wouldnt be as slippery as youd think.

    Anyhow, to sum up, the whole topic is pretty new to me and my opinions are still forming, just thought I’d give you some impressions. Be good to hear which argument you go with.

    Look forward to the next show.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *