The NZ Department of Internal Affairs is launching a web filter to block child abuse images (CAI)/child pornography(CP) (See my thoughts on terminology) in March, according to ZDNet. As part of the structure, there will be an Independent Reference Group that will have oversight of the process and be a point of review for complaints against the filter and its operation.

I am part of the Independent Reference Group, mainly because I don’t believe the filter will work, and because I am implacably opposed to any extension of it.

(more…)

One of the fraught issues, when looking at censorship, is child abuse images (CAI), also known as “child pornography” (note that I disdain the use of “kiddie porn” as it diminishes the importance of the issue). Anyone with children feels this one in the gut, that it could be their child being abused but for the grace of whatever deity they look to. I’ll own up front that I have no children, and thus little emotional stake in the debate, which is both a good and bad thing. Good, because I can look at the issue rationally and try to get to the bottom of it; bad, because many involved in the debate are so invested and regard those who are not with some suspicion. I can live with that.

Let me say, also, that I do not support the CAI ‘industry’, either the images or the rationalisations that many use to justify it. It does disgust me, but so does the life and death of JonBenet Ramsay and other matters of the exploitation of children for whatever reason. What I do support is rational policy based on hard data and not on unproven assumptions.

For the record, I was involved in 2005 in some research and testing for InternetNZ, Netsafe and the Department of Internal Affairs. We were looking at the Internet Watch Foundation’s filter list and assessing it for use in NZ. My conclusion then was that, although the list appeared to contain nothing that wasn’t related to CAI (I freely admit that I did not check every link!), it would not be a silver bullet in preventing NZ Internet users from seeing all CAI material. I was investigating the freedom of speech aspect as much as the efficacy of the filter. What I was looking for, particularly, was whether the list blocked material that would be legal in NZ (not really) and, more importantly, whether it allowed material that is illegal under NZ law (which it does). (more…)