nocensorshipaus

National Forum Series: The Tangled Web

2009-04-27T22:45:00.002+10:00

From New Matilda (Similar events have been held in Brisbane and Melbourne - this evening)

New Matilda Sydney Event Tuesday 5th. May 2009

SYDNEY EVENT:

SPEAKERS:
Fiona Patten, The Australian Sex Party
Geordie Guy, Electronic Frontiers Australia
Kerry Graham, Inspire Foundation

WHEN:
Tuesday 5 May, 6:00pm

WHERE:
NSW Parliament Theatrette
Parliament of NSW
Macquarie Street, Sydney

This is a free event. RSVP is essential: enquiries(at)newmatilda.com
[Please inc: "Sydney Forum" in the subject line]

These events are part of a series of forums. newmatilda.com will present an event in Adelaide in coming weeks. We held the first forum in Brisbane in late March.

posted by Bob Bain

MARCH IN MARCH 21st. MARCH 2009 Canberra ACT

2009-03-17T13:23:00.005+11:00

--------

MARCH IN MARCH

--------

WHERE

Parliament House side of Federation Mall, Canberra

(Scroll down for how to get there!)

WHEN

1:00 PM 21st of March, 2009

(Press conference at 11:00 AM)

WHY

The DLC have been organising rallies in capital cities for the past three months raising awareness as to the governments plans to censor the internet and the negative impact involved.

This is only the tip of the wedge of censorship being driven into our society by a vocal minority, as they say, the best time to defend your freedom is while you still have it.

While Senators change their minds daily, and the media report that the filter will go ahead, or won't go ahead almost as regularly--the fact remains--this issue will not be put to bed unless Australians defend their democracy against the very ideology of censorship

Children in Artworks Protocols - effective January 1st. 2009

2008-12-21T14:01:00.001+11:00

Art's Council releases children in Art protocols (Art Council Press Release)

16 December 2008

The protocols address the depiction and employment of children in artworks, exhibitions and publications that receive Australia Council funding.

The protocols include an overview of applicable state and territory laws which form the basis for a set of reasonable minimum standards that will apply to all Australia Council grants from 1 January 2009.

Australia Council chief executive officer Kathy Keele said the protocols will help artists and organisations who work with children do so with proper care and responsibility.

‘The Australia Council has addressed many of the issues raised during an extensive consultation process. We received 42 written submissions on the draft protocols that were released in November, and made several changes as a result. I’d like to thank everyone who took the time make comments and contribute to the protocols,’ she said.

‘We want to help the creative community take appropriate steps when depicting children in artworks, and we believe these protocols strike a good balance between upholding the right to freedom of artistic expression and the rights of children to protection from exploitation.

‘The protocols will have no impact on our assessment of artistic excellence through the peer review process. Applicants will ‘tick a box’ on the application form to indicate whether they plan to work with children. If successful, their contract will confirm the applicants are to comply with the protocols,’ Ms Keele said.

The main changes from the draft to the final protocols include:

clarifying that images of children in public situations do not require parental consent
clarifying the obligations for artists of getting parental consent
limiting the paperwork required for documentation
limiting the need for Classification Board review of images of naked children only to those created with the involvement of a real child in the last 18 years, not cartoons or drawings or digital creations made entirely from imagination
allowing service organisations funded to host websites where artists upload their own images, providing they have a web policy incorporating the key obligations of the protocols.

----------------------------------------

Critique by David Marr Sydney Morning Herald December 19th. 2008

"With a scrubbing brush in one hand and a packet of Ajax in the other, the Australia Council is scouring the internet of art. It's not the arts bureaucrats' fault, poor wretches. Being the cleaning ladies of the cyber age is not what they signed up for. They had dreams of "cultivating the nation's creativity" until the Rudd Government put them to work to scrub pictures of children from the net.

Not pornographic pictures. Not obscene pictures. Not just pictures of naked kids. We're talking any pictures of children at all. Once the council's new "Protocols for Working with Children" come into effect on January 1, arts funding will be ripped from anyone posting pictures of children on the internet unless onerous conditions are met.

The nation is moving deep into wacky territory. Trials of compulsory internet filtering are about to start.

A poor bloke in Queensland is in court for forwarding from one internet site to another a weird but happy sequence of an adult swinging a kid around. And now the Australia Council is getting into the business of busting art online.

Even the glimpse of a child will be enough to attract the council's scrubbing brush. A hand or a foot will do."

posted by Bob Bain

Desktop Internet Filtering (uncensored email from Content Watch)

2008-12-08T11:46:00.000+11:00

Message received by nocensorshipaus on December 6th. 2008

December 4, 2008

            We are writing on behalf of ContentWatch, Inc., makers of Net Nanny parental control software. Net Nanny has been the desktop Internet filter of choice for Australians over the last 10 plus years, as well as the leading parental control solution in the world currently installed in 157 countries.

            Net Nanny has proudly worked with ACMA (the Australian Content and Media Authority) over the last 10 years in accepting lists of illegal sites to be blocked to Australian citizens upon installation of Net Nanny.

            Net Nanny was submitted into the original PAFO (Protecting Australian Families Online) scheme and went through several rigorous tests that proved the effectiveness of Net Nanny’s patent-pending Dynamic Contextual Analysis filtering engine. At the time of testing, we were confident that the most trusted brand of consumer Internet filtering in the world would be accepted into the program to help increase the visibility and take-up of desktop filters in the PAFO program. Net Nanny did indeed pass the Additional PC Filter Product invitation, but the PAFO program was frozen before we could be added to the list of approved vendors.

            Since that time, we have followed the Netalert program and the current proposed ISP filtering plan. As a company that provides both consumer desktop filters and filtering appliances that ISPs can use on their back-end, we share many of the same concerns that Australian citizens and ISPs have been voicing as well as some other issues rarely mentioned in this debate.

            At the forefront, the issues around censorship, network performance, filter effectiveness, and ISP liability have been discussed in newspapers, editorials, blogs, etc. As this is being written, the first ISP in Australia has volunteered to trial the ISP filter program and we all eagerly await the results. We at ContentWatch do not believe the ISP filtering plan goes far enough to help protect Australian families from not only inappropriate and illegal content, but from inappropriate contacts and conduct as well. When looking at the ISP filter plan, a few questions arise:

·   How does the plan help protect families against online predators, cyberbullies, scammers and other people online who have ill-intentions?
·   With the rise of Internet addiction, how will families be able to control the amount of time children are spending online?
·   How does ISP filtering address secure and non-secure proxy web sites and anonymizers, which allow users to circumvent filters to gain access to illegal content?
·   How will the plan prevent P2P downloads and copyright infringement?
·   How can families adjust the filter to meet their personal family values based on religious or cultural preferences?
·   How does the ISP filter keep up with new content and web sites as they are created, in particular in the Web 2.0 paradigm and the social networking phenomenon?
            With a desktop parental control solution such as Net Nanny, every family in Australia can have confidence that not only are illegal web sites like child porn being blocked for their safety, but all of the above issues are addressed in such a solution.

Net Nanny 6.0, released 2 weeks ago, features unprecedented protection for families by issuing parental alerts around instant messages involving cyberbullying and cyberpredators, incorporates social network profile reporting and also aggressively blocks and filters anonymizers and encrypted proxy servers commonly used by teens to circumvent filters. This recent release of Net Nanny has earned the top software review award for the 2nd year in a row in the U.S., the PC Magazine Editors’ Choice Award for Parental Controls. Additionally, Net Nanny has now been selected as the top ranked Internet filter for 5 years running on TopTenReviews.com as well as rated #1 by 6 other review sites. Net Nanny is also proud to announce that we also now protect families who use Macs.

            If the Australian government were to take a more aggressive and pro-active role in actually facilitating the distribution of desktop filters to all Australian families, the program would go a long way in being more effective and allowing families to take responsibility for what comes into their home over the Internet. The current funding for the program allocates dollars to both ISP and PC level filters. As the most widely accepted and recognized desktop PC filter in Australia, Net Nanny is supportive of the program to protect families and would help ensure the uptake of the software and visibility of the initiative.

            This could be done in a cost effective manner by using the ISPs to deliver the software freely to their customers. For example, TTNet, the largest broadband services provider in Turkey has over 235,000 customers using Net Nanny filtering as part of their value-added services. In a more far-reaching proposal, the government could send a CD to every home with children as well as making CDs freely available in places that families and children frequent, such as stores, restaurants, schools, libraries, sporting events. All of these physical locations can take part in raising awareness of the issues while distributing the needed tools for families.

            Anything that ContentWatch can do to help clarify and further the discussion around the best options to protect families in Australia, we are more than willing to do. We look forward to being engaged in this important Australian government initiative.

Sincerely,

Larry Aiken                                         Peter Ferioli
Director of Channel Sales                    Director of Net Nanny Operations

.gif images of signatures were included with the email

posted by admin (nocensorshipaus)

Cyber Law Centre ISP Level Filtering Forum 27th November 2008

2008-11-29T17:33:00.002+11:00

These are a few media responses to the Cyber Law Centre ISP Level Filtering Forum (University of NSW)

Net Filters Debated by Experts at Cyber Law Forum Kathryn Small 28th November 2008

But the mood of the day was summed up by a sixteen-year-old student who addressed the conference about her experiences with web filters.

“I have been surfing the web for most of my school life, at school and home, with filters and without, and I have never accidentally stumbled upon pornographic material,” she said.

“We want education, not restriction.”

A National banter on Filtering James Hutchinson 28th November 2008

Guess what Mr. Conroy? There's a sound coming from UNSW Kensington campus, and it's a big and resounding "NO". It's not a "no" as in, "we want free Internet so we can look at kiddy porn guilt-free". In fact, anyone who linked freedom and child pornography at the discussion was guaranteed to be shown the front door.

Instead, it appears that even those present at the discussion that would have a hand to play in imposing the filter - namely representatives from Optus and Cisco - are negative toward the entire process and for good reason. The filter won't work and people will simply bypass it. Our government might have the same ambition as China, but it certainly doesn't have the will or guts to police it.

Brisbane Times Asher Moses November 28th 2008

Support for the Government's plan to censor the internet has hit rock bottom, with even children's welfare groups now saying that that the mandatory filters, aimed squarely at protecting kids, are ineffective and a waste of money.

posted by Bob Bain 29th. November 2008

Australia Council Children in art protocols Phase 1 consultation: Summary of responses

2008-10-30T13:18:00.002+11:00

Australia Council children in art protocols Phase 1 consultation: Summary of responses

Australia Council 29th. October 2008

posted by Bob Bain

Quote from "Good Weekend" 4th. October 2008 (Bill Henson)

2008-10-04T16:35:00.002+10:00

"Is there a point in trying to control, almost as a kind of thought police, the endless ever-changing infinitely various unstoppable
human imagination that's out there? Every back fence you go over has got a different bunch of people and a different bunch of whatever is in their heads. I think it's a pointless exercise trying to control it."

quote attributed to Bill Henson (artist and photographer) SMH Good Weekend October 4th. 2008. (article by David Marr)

posted by Bob Bain

Aboriginals can't be trusted with raunchy pay TV: Opposition

2008-09-17T15:59:00.005+10:00

The Liberals are pushing in the Senate for a "blanket ban" on pornography on pay TV available in Aboriginal communities, claiming that it leads to abuse.

In a move that combines all the usual suspects - hand waving arguments, save-the-children hysteria ("watching pornography led to child abuse"), and government paternalism, they have managed to add racism as well. It's hard for me, personally, to imagine that any aboriginal Australian would not be insulted by this call which paints them as such out-of-control child abusers that they can't be allowed to watch a blue movie on the telly.

Of course, since the South Australian senator Cory Bernardi was quoted as saying, "the Coalition supports a blanket ban on pornography on pay TV," it may be the case that want to push this campaign even further in the future. Fortunately the Rudd Government has so far not indicated any willingness to play along either in the NT or the country as a whole.

Software Freedom Day Melbourne

2008-09-13T17:28:00.002+10:00

At the Software Freedom Day to be held in Melbourne ( Saturday 20th September 2008 )

Dale Clapperton of Electronic Frontiers Australia will spend a hour from 12 noon "presenting on a range of issue concerning your on-line freedoms and rights".

Brianna Laugher will spend an hour from 2 pm discussing 'How Free Software makes Wikipedia Possible".

Both of these presentations and discussions could refer to censorship related issues.

posted by Bob Bain

ALP warns against censorship (2003) !

2008-09-12T18:46:00.003+10:00

From The Age Saturday 5 July 2003, 8:05 AM

ALP warns against film censorship

The closing down of the screening of banned film Ken Park in Sydney was disturbing, the federal opposition said.

Police intervened to stop the film being shown at a public meeting in the inner-Sydney suburb of Balmain and confiscated three DVD copies of the film.

The event's organisers, including film critic Margaret Pomeranz, are likely to receive an official police caution.

Shadow minister for the arts, Kate Lundy, said there was community concern that the Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) was making "increasingly conservative and restrictive decisions".

"I believe that in a free society adults should be able to view whatever they want, provided that those involved in the making of the film have broken no laws," she said in a statement.

"I am concerned that the OFLC seems to have made a decision at variance with many other countries.

"Ken Park has been shown commercially at many other film festivals around the world and has been sold commercially to 30 countries."

Senator Lundy questioned whether the OFLC decision genuinely reflected community standards.

"Our classification regime must not be allowed to become a censorship regime," she said.

©2003 AAP

posted by Bob Bain

Live ISP filtering trial coming soon

2008-09-12T09:19:00.005+10:00

Australian IT reports this morning that live ISP Filtering trials are set to commence after next month. Expressions of interest will be sought from ISPs during October.

===========

The Government will seek expressions of interest in the second half of October for ISPs to participate in live trials, a spokesperson for Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said.

[..]

About $49 million of the allocation has been slated for online law enforcement, but it remains unclear how much has been set aside solely for web filtering, as the budget includes research, international collaboration and education programs.

But the actual cost of internet censorship to taxpayers has yet to be quantified.

Some industry observers believe internet users, not ISPs, could be forced to subsidise the program, with early estimates pointing to $60 million a year.

===========

posted by Michael Meloni

Other wikis - Encyclopedia Dramatica

2008-09-11T16:58:00.002+10:00

The article Internets (from Encyclopedia Dramatica - a wiki) contains images and material arguably far more controversial than anything Wikipedia may publish but in my view it is both informative and educational.

It is somewhat of a mystery if wikis such as Encyclopedia Dramatica would fall under the "banned and/or offensive" category of Senator Stephen Conroy's censoring (filtering) plan and/or if adults in Australia would be permitted to view it.

Warning the site referred to may contain images or material potentially more offensive than anything contained in Wikipedia as mentioned in a reply to a response to an entry regarding alleged offensive content in Wikipedia. ( link to earlier posting and my answer to that response )

posted by Bob Bain

Sexually graphic images on Wikipedia stir debates (continuation of a theme)

2008-09-10T20:31:00.003+10:00

According to Computerworld today (10 Sep 2008)

Wikipedia has come under fire from some child protection groups over the inclusion of graphic sexual images in some entries. Childwise head Bernadette McMenamin told News Limited that some of the images easily accessible via the site crossed the line to what is deemed sexually explicit. The page on 'hardcore pornography', for instance, includes two stills from behind the scenes at a pornographic movie set, including one featuring explicit sex.

===========

The article continues..

Wikipedia has a strict anti-censorship policy – the phrase 'Wikipedia is not censored' is included in what is essentially the group's mission statement. As is the warning that "Wikipedia cannot guarantee that articles or images will always be acceptable to all readers, or that they will adhere to general social or religious norms."

=================

The Wikipedia article (embedded link above) notes that "Since 1969, most of the world's liberal democracies have taken steps to legalize hardcore pornography. or they increasingly fail to enforce legislation to prohibit it resulting in de facto legalization."

The latter statement is to all intents and purposes the case in New South Wales, where the alleged pornographic image depicted in the Wikipedia article would be considered mild to inconsequential by those familiar with what is on sale and often mislabeled as being "X" rated (a legal rating for the Australian Capital Territory) despite often falling outside the official "guidelines" - noting that "guidelines" are just that.

The law does not state that a legal classification has to satisfy the guidelines. The process of classification is a discretionary one as is the right to import from overseas - qualified by statements such as "to the extent the item should not be classified/imported" (paraphrased) and in my view the onus of proof should lie with those who wish to hinder freedom of sexual expression as to why an item should NOT be classified or imported rather than the reverse situation that appears to apply)

====================

I have noted in the past that some corporate filters block access to wikis (of which Wikipedia is just one) thus depriving employees of a useful and frequently updated source of information. This poster is not convinced that this is a healthy trend. There is a trend for some Universities to debunk Wikipedia, but again I feel this is merely to bolster their position as one of the major sources of legitimate information - despite the fact that much of that information is itself censored and I would suggest the recent book "The Porn Report" is an excellent example of this (based on a talk given by the author to the Sydney Institute) which is at the time of posting available for download from the Sydney Institute(click on the podcast section and click the podcast download for the 21st May 2008 ). I understand the research framework forbade investigation into illegal sources of pornographic content thus confining research into items legally classified by the Australian Classification Board.

It is known that University staff use Wikipedia as a source of information. We live in a changing world.

posted by Bob Bain

Wiki Worries ?

2008-09-10T09:01:00.002+10:00

YouTube Video (link)

The clip above was captured from the Channel 7 Sunrise Program this morning (10th Sep 2008) and discusses possible censorship of Wikipedia in respect of information and images regarding sexual content (referred to as "pornographic" by Professor Brooks).

Commentary by Media Studies Professor Karen Brooks.

posted by Bob Bain

SMH self-censors Islam comments in video

2008-09-09T13:58:00.002+10:00

In a a small but very worrying sign that some areas of debate have become off-limits in our society, 10 seconds of audio go mysteriously missing in a video hosted by the Sydney Morning Herald. The SMH is a co-sponsor of a series of public debates called Intelligence Squared, and hosts the videos on its site. 33 minutes into the debate on the controversial subject, "We'd be better off without religion", SMH columnist Richard Ackland is speaking for the affirmative, and brings up the subject of the chilling effect religion has on art and free speech.

Art that satirizes or even mocks religious sensibility is to be tossed on the fire and the artists flayed. More recently Random House has decided not to publish "The Jewel of Medina", for fear it may incite acts of violence. The book is described as an..."

10 seconds of silence follows as Mr Ackland continues. The audio resumes with the line "it's difficult stuff, but nothing a suicide bombing couldn't fix." If this is deliberate - and an audio glitch occuring at just this point in the debate seems a mighty coincidence - it rates a 10/10 on the irony-meter, doesn't it?

Watch the video here.

How to access "naughty comedy" on your 3 mobile

2008-09-08T21:10:00.000+10:00

Access All Areas (3 mobile phone network)

Access all areas of Planet 3 with a PIN
Get your Access All Areas password

Over 18? It's easy to access MA and R-rated stuff on Planet 3 like Def Jam Comedy, Playboy, Stud TV and Big Brother Platinum. All you need is an Access All Areas password.

posted by Bob Bain

Organised crime 'dominates porn industry'

2008-09-06T12:35:00.001+10:00

According to News.com.au September 2nd 2008

By Sean Plambeck
September 02, 2008 12:00am

ORGANISED crime is pocketing up to 97 per cent of the estimated $300 million adult DVD wholesale market in Australia, a leading porn distributor says.

Adultshop.com managing director Malcolm Day told NEWS.com.au his company supplied almost all the legal DVDs in Australia but was being by beaten by crime syndicate piracy.

"It is a $300 million dollar wholesale industry and that is why organised crime wants a piece of it

"They sell about 97 per cent of all adult DVDs in Australia."

------------------------------

Fiona Patten the chief executive of the Eros Association, which represents adult retail and entertainment companies, said the industry was also threatened by YouTube style websites and file-sharing online.

Ms Patten said the pornography industry wanted to crack down on stolen content but was wary of a backlash from internet communities similar to when the music industry moved to shut down websites like Napster.

"We are probably handling file sharing differently than the music industry, we are working out how to work with the sharing models – people are willing to pay for this amateur content so we are looking at ideas like pay-per-view models," she said.

"The production companies realise they need to have a presence on those sites, if you can't beat them – join them, and are looking at dealing with more realistic prices, and pay by the minute products."

Posted by Bob Bain

Aussie censor says her role isn't to censor

2008-09-05T18:30:00.004+10:00

Alexandra Greene, a 31 year old member of the Australian Classification Board says her role is not to censor, but rather to inform people about what they are about to watch and if necessary restrict the content from being viewed.

You've got to wonder what Greene thinks restricting legal content is, if not an act of censorship. Playing our national mummy perhaps?

She goes onto tell News.com.au in this interview that 'People should be able to watch or read what they like but we do need to protect people and children from unsolicited material, or at least give them the choice if they want to watch it.'

'I saw an interview with (Scottish comedian) Ronnie Barker where he said double entendres were OK because the children couldn't understand it and the adults would get a laugh. But now it's that adults get offended because they're worried their kids might understand.'

Do kids even give a hoot? Grow up Mum.

posted by Michael Meloni

Varying censorship rules are "frustrating" - Hines

2008-09-03T22:40:00.002+10:00

According to Games Industry Biz

Pete Hines, Bethesda's product manager for Fallout 3, has expressed frustration at the varying censorship rules in different parts of the world, and that while the company makes its games in its own way, it's always mindful of the issues it will face with subjects such as violence, drug references and nudity.

"The frustrating thing for us is that the standards and rules can be so varied across territories, that we work with five or six ratings agencies and each one has different 'hot buttons'," he told CVG.

"In one place nudity is a big deal but violence is fine, and in another place drugs are a problem but nudity is fine. I guess that's the way of the world - not every country is the same. You're not aiming at one target, you're aiming at six different ones, worrying about how each one will feel about different things.

posted via Thunderbird email client

posted by Bob Bain

Recollections of talk by Helen Vnuk 2004 "In the Realm of the Censors"

2008-09-02T21:53:00.005+10:00

From...

Logged Off - Link...

How does the OFLC define offensive and what reasonable community standards are - how often do these terms and guidelines get reviewed?

I'll give you the definition from Guidelines for the Classification of Publications, September 1999. "Offensive: Material which causes outrage or extreme disgust. The Guidelines distinguish between material which may offend some sections of the adult community, and material which offends against generally accepted standards, and is therefore likely to offend most people."

I'm not sure how they decide what "generally accepted standards" or even "reasonable community standards" are. I would imagine that's a very difficult thing to judge. I wouldn't like to have to guess at it. My friends tend to be fairly open-minded, so I probably have a distorted view of what "generally accepted standards" are. The guidelines get reviewed every few years (before the 1999 guidelines, the previous set of guidelines was drawn up in 1992). When they're reviewed, there's a call for submissions from the public. Last time there were 147 submissions, a lot of them from religious groups or from people who blamed porn for all of society's problems. This was used as justification for bringing in tighter restrictions. Obviously this system is flawed. The average person isn't going to make a submission to the government - even if they do enjoy reading Penthouse.

==========================================

In your opinion does the OFLC act as a political tool for the government of the day rather than a reflection of the contemporary population's views? How could this be improved?

A lot of people want to blame John Howard for the OFLC's decisions, but I don't know whether things would be very different under a Labor government. There are very strong conservative forces in both major parties at the moment, as well as some vocal conservative independents, and that's why a lot of censorship rulings don't reflect the contemporary population's views. To me, the solution is to get an independent organisation to do some proper community consultation and come up with a new set of guidelines that would, I would hope, be less restrictive than the current ones. If we could get rid of the ban on fetishes in X-rated videos, the ban on genital detail (ie, inner labia) in sex magazines and a few other things like that, then no matter how conservative the people appointed to the OFLC board are (and John Howard does get a say on that), they couldn't do too much harm.

"In the Realm of the Censors" included a series of discussions in Sydney in 2004. These are some hastily scribbled notes from one of those discussions.

posted by Bob Bain

Fiona Giles and David Haines talk at the "In the Realm of the Censors" 2004

2008-09-02T21:47:00.003+10:00

This is from scrawled barely readable notes from the interesting Censorship talk held this afternoon at the State Archive. ("RChive")

The talk attracted 17 attendees (one of whom works for the Archive "Liz" I believe) plus Curator Susan Charlton plus the speakers Fiona Giles and David Haines. The format was largely by way of Fiona Giles interviewing David Haines, although there was a brief interlude where Fiona Giles spoke about her own work and interests.

David it appears is a fellow Pom having migrated to Australia from somewhere exotic seemingly based on a romantic interlude (well that's what I've written).

Prior to working as Deputy Censor he seems to have been exposed to little or no erotic material. I believe he mentioned some association with Adultshop. From what I can read of my scribbled notes some Attorney General (possibly a State AG) seemingly made some comment that some of this new technology should be banned altogether (possibly in jest?).

May I suggest Jeff Shaw.... ?? (only speculation)

In relation to his work as Deputy Censor he recalled that there were some 30,000+ complaints with regard to a film "Hail Mary" but that decisions are not based on such pressure but on the "merits of the case" (or similar wording). There was some comments made regarding the banning of David Irving entering Australia and complaints from the Jewish Board of Deputies regarding a film that he may have felt was possibly over classified as "R" on account of the number of complaints (it seemingly contained concentration camp type scenes often seen on TV in documentaries).

I've made a note that he became Deputy Censor around 1981/1982 but that nobody is permitted to make a career of censorship on the basis as I understand it that they may become desensitised.

He seemed to err on the side of caution when it came to classifying but preferred not to ban films altogether. In classification his reaction was perhaps a conservative one but he felt being a "liberal" that banning a film completely required considerable deliberation. His own personal views seem to be against violence and I have noted that Australian made (pornographic) films made in Australia would (paraphrasing his words) be regarded as tame in countries of Europe where there is greater demand for material that would be banned here (my words) and that the market both here and overseas for Australian produced material would be minimal - noting that export grants are not permitted with regards to "X" or "R" rated material derived from and/or during the filming of "X" rated material (Senator Harradine was mentioned in this regard).

He noted that most pornographic material he had seen was/is absolute rubbish (or words to that effect). I believe the term he used was "becoming punch drunk from watching absolute rubbish".

He noted that one censor had a psychological test prior to becoming a censor and a second test on relinquishing the position with the outcome being that she had seemingly become "more tolerant" or perhaps "more sensitive to censorship issues" (scribbled notes).

He seemed to indicate that around 0.08% material submitted would have been considered totally offensive (my note: most pornographic material these days doesn't even reach the censors office !) with perhaps 8 items of youthful porn being deliberated upon.

He noted that most material originated from America with some 9,000 titles per year being produced. (My note that most material on sale in Sydney originates in Europe not the United States and has never seen a censor or a classification board)

There was some commentary on "lactation porn" which seemed to be a topic of interest to Fiona Giles who noted (I believe) that many women get off on it and I've noted the term "adult nurse" where "women communicate over the Internet with regards to this type of material" (well that's what I've written).

I have seen "pregnant porn" and "lactating porn" for sale in Sydney but not for many years....

Fiona noted that in respect of her earlier books there was little "editorial control", but in the production of her latest book (about breasts) there was far more control and concern expressed at an editorial level. (The first book was "Dicks for something" and the second "Chicks for something" (bad scrawl - bad eyesight... must look these references up).

David was lured to become a pornographic films producer with his first work (producer not actor) seemingly being "Buffy Down Under" which cost $70,000 to make and sold in "X" and "R" versions some 16,000 copies. He noted there were always two cameras - one for the "X" version of one for the "R" version which require different parts of the anatomy the be photographed (not photographed).

Being a producer means:-

finding "talent"
finding equipment
writing the script
choosing location etc...

David seemed to indicate that male actors were/are terrible at reading / remembering lines which he seemed to regard as a shame given that his scripts were meant to be humorous (at least for the "R" rated versions).

There also seemed to be complications "getting wood" which could slow down production by a couple of hours. I can only speculate what the term "getting wood" means (presumably achieving and maintaining an erection in company and under the supervision of countless people).

A second film involving "Buffy" was never produced. He noted that during production the cameraman's hands tend to wobble, which is regarded as problematic. When viewing or monitoring material he admitted that what was being produced was of no consequence. The "meaning" (or otherwise) of the material being produced wasn't forefront in his mind.

He noted that in his experience only two actors had problems with being identified as being in a pornographic film after production.

His second film was "Revenge Australian Style" in which he made a brief appearance (clothed not as an actor) the "R" version being intended for European audiences and regarded in some way as containing (or meaning to contain) witty dialogue. However as noted it's a belief that Australian sourced material wouldn't be popular in Europe where a greater range of material is available (some of it here in Sydney)

There was some discussion regarding a "Ken Park" and a film called "Irreversible" (note http://www.garbledonline.net/irreversible.html) where he mentioned that he had to look away from the violent rape scene. I haven't heard of or seen this film.

David seems turned off by violence and notes that there are some portrayals that clearly shouldn't be on the agenda (I may disagree with him on aspects of that) noting that child porn was one, but he also noted that he had never seen "an unhappy dog in a porno film" (which is also my [limited] experience. Dogs take great pleasure in sex with humans)

(This cropped in conversation in "The Forum" at one stage...Yoda's odd forum that I've been reading for years)

He noted that no violence or even hint of violence was/is permitted in "X" films. A gun on a table would have the film removed from the "X" rating immediately.

With regards to the revised standards he noted that in some respects these were potentially more liberal than others believe.

That's what I've scrawled down.

There were some questions from the audience. One involved the importation of films from overseas noting a belief that control now rests with "OFLC trained customs officers) (correct) which he seemed unaware of. He also mentioned that if someone attempts to import material of a similar genre twice then they can expect to be prosecuted. I dispute his interpretation of that as when speaking to Australian Customs on the issue I was told it only applied with respect to a tile "condemned to the crown" and presumably each film is dealt with based on Australian standards (and they can differ or be misleading from film to film. I dispute his understanding of this).

I purchased an "X" rated film from "hidden surveillance cameras" on the way to the talk and will possibly watch it and possibly review it tomorrow. This I regard as a privacy issue and I haven't purchased it for pleasure. It will be a struggle watching it as I'm not a great fan of sex or nudity in films although I am tolerant their production and distribution (the method and ethics often under question) as indeed I am to fantasy material of various kinds - some of which may well appeal to me (more so than sex or porno films which do nothing for me).

Any errors due to poor eyesight, handwriting. and/or hearing and attention span :-)

If there are errors in interpretation forgive me !

"In the Realm of the Censors" was held in Sydney in 2004.

posted by Bob Bain

Notes from Discussion 2 "In the Realm of the Censors" 2004

2008-09-02T21:38:00.003+10:00

I attended the second talk in a series of four talks associated with the (minimal) exhibition "In the Realm of the Censors" yesterday...

The talk was by way of a conversation between David Marr and Frank Moorhouse and was vigorous in tone and in language.

Some brief notes I have scribbled include: (apologies for any errors)

Reference to "The State Within" a term I haven't heard before which indicates that we carry inside us the will of the state whether we know it or not and "The Church Within".

Reference was made to an analogy of "hahas" (hidden ditches) which I understand are trenches used in lieu of fences. (I'm not sure of the spelling). It was noted that much censorship isn't visible due to the fact that although there are no visible fences there are "unseen hahas". A "Lord of the Manor" may look out over his land and see nothing but "freedom" as the "hahas" are invisible. Censorship is like that. We don't know that it's taking place.

Reference was also made to "it's all but over now" where each generation believes that censorship is coming to an end which has never been and probably never will be the case.

There was some reference to the struggle between the Christian religion and other forms of philosophy noting that in Christian thought - fucking is alright provided it's done in the name of the reproduction of the species and not for pleasure.

Reference was made to some controversial necklace worn by some Wendy person which read "I have been fucked by God's steel prick" which it was alleged may have been a religious statement of some kind. I'm not sure of the reference but the quote was seemingly edited in the press such that nobody could understand it.

The trial regarding "Portnoy's Complaint" was discussed. It was stated that the book was deemed "obscene" in every state (except NSW) however in New South Wales (unlike other states) it went before a jury. The defending lawyer was noted as having a long pointing finger which he used to advantage.

Some mention was made of the Gary Glitter "child porn" case noting that press reports indicated some tens of thousands of images of children. It was questioned "what sort of images of children were these ?". The reporting of number somehow implies that an offence or alleged offence is bad. I have a CD from 1992 which allegedly contains 28,000 erotic images. If subject to litigation I have no doubt the press might report "Mr X was found to be in possession of 28,000 erotic images" despite the fact I purchased the disks when they were legal to sell and do not contain child pornography of any kind (which was illegal back in 1992 almost everywhere).

There were comments made along the lines that if the state chooses material to censor then it also decides and is responsible for what not to censor which places it in an arguably difficult position.

The flow down effect of the elimination of violence from "X" rated films was noted.

A comment was made in respect of the film Ken Park that a lot of noise was made about a wanking scene but no comments were made that later in the film one of the children murders his grandparents with a knife.

(in passing I had images from Ken Park and Baise Moi on a censorship page for a while and one self appointed "liberal" ("I'm very broad minded") noted in a forum that he agreed with Fred Nile that "we don't want this sort of stuff in the country" and that the Prohibited Import Regulations to the Customs Act were as good a way as any to hinder it's importation.)

I believe it was Frank Moorhouse who suggested the term "anti-censorship" shouldn't be used and that the term "uncensored people" was more appropriate. I would like to consider myself an uncensored person but sadly find this is not the case and that those who would censor me are often those who claim we have rights to freedom of expression and that often those who claim to be "liberal" or "broad minded" often prove by their comments that they are neither liberal nor broad minded.

I believe it was David Marr who noted that he could quote the addresses of a dozen or so stores which sell "legitimate X rated movies" in contravention of state laws, noting that it was a belief that "some public official is being corrupted" and that (possibly) "somebody's on the take" which I believe he may find unacceptable (as I do).

An honest uncensored person does not (IMHO) find corruption or possible corruption an acceptable alternative to censorship.

And BTW around 30% of the titles marked "X" on sale in Sydney are not and have never been rated "X" by the OFLC.

The name of journalist Piers Ackerman was mentioned a few times although in what context I can't recall.

There was mention that one way of imposing censorship was by placing restrictions on the technology that creates it with comments that printing presses at some stage in history had to be licenced. As a personal comment moves to hinder expression via technological means are currently well under way - call it Digital Rights Maintenance or Region Coding (or whatever).

There were around 50 people in the audience and about two (possibly three) people raised questions from the floor.

It appears that the exhibition is regarded as highly controversial in some quarters and appears to relate to publications rather than video material.

Copies of the OFLC guidelines for publications were freely available.

"In the Realm of the Censors" was held in Sydney in 2004. These notes are from those sessions.

posted by Bob Bain

Replies regarding games classification and importing prohibited goods..

2008-08-30T19:58:00.003+10:00

According to Games website Kotaku

Australian Classification Board Speaks On R18+ Games

Who should I be contacting to push the need for an R18+ rating for games?

Currently, the Censorship Minister is the Attorney-General for each State or Territory and the Australian Censorship Minister is the Minister for Home Affairs.

Can I import games that have been refused classification?

Customs may detain or seize any items that are suspected of contravening the Regulations. The maximum penalty for this type of offence is a fine of up to $110,000.

posted by Bob Bain

Inside Australia's game ratings body

2008-08-30T19:50:00.003+10:00

Article from CNet Australia

By Laura Parker on 29 August 2008

The Classification Board — formerly the Office of Film and Literature Classification — is an independent body that classifies films, computer games and publications. Guidelines for classification are set out in the National Classification Code, agreed by the Australian Government and the States and Territories, and the Classification Board must abide by these when making classification decisions. The Classification Review Board, also an independent body, can review original classification decisions in certain circumstances and make a new classification decision.

Previously the OFLC, the office was disbanded and its members made part of the Attorney General's department. The body was renamed the Classification Board, and still performs the same role as before.

In this Q&A we've tackled all the big questions with the newly-named Classification Board to give an insight into what makes its members tick. We tracked down a Classification Board spokeswoman to give us all the details. And for more information about games classification, check out our in-depth feature, Censory Overload.

posted by Bob Bain

Facts about this blog

2008-08-30T10:35:00.001+10:00

This blog has been created to document the state of censorship in Australia. It replaces nocensorshipaus.blogspot.com which has been deleted and is no longer available for use (google blogspot policy).

The blog is not moderated and comments on entries can be made by anyone, although they should relate to the issue being discussed and/or censorship in Australia and censorship in general where censorship includes anything and everything relating to censorship including freedom of speech and erotic or "objectionable" content.

Thanks

nocensorshipaus at gmail.com
admin at nocensorshipaus.net

BLOG created

2008-08-30T09:55:00.001+10:00

Blog created 30th. August 2008