Aside from CP for a minute, I'm even moar pissed off about wanting to censor youtube from all RC content
What content is RC on youtube?
The government states that they're just enforcing existing classification rules in censoring RC content on the internet. This is true. What remains shockingly unchallenged and unmentioned in this debate, is the legitimacy of what is and isn't considered RC content. Stuff like information on euthanasia and harm minimization content is RC in Australia, therefore banned in print, and will be censored under this filter.
An example would be Australian of the year finalist Philip Nitschke, and his book 'the peaceful pill' handbook. This book is RC in Australia due to its content, whereas it is freely available in bookstores in more enlightened nations such as New Zealand.
Currently you can view this book in full on 'google books', but according to the leaked blacklist, access to this resource will be prohibited.
Whatever you think about the right to euthanasia, individuals in a democracy should be able to debate and discuss this information.
RC is total bullshit in the first place, even when it was applied to print. This information never should have been declared RC in the first place. The debate about the internet filter is way too limited and closeted, it's missing the bigger picture that what we should be debating is the whole legitimacy and content of what is considered RC.
The stated purpose of classification is to reflect community standards and expectations. The government and classification board are not reflecting community standards when they refuse classification and public access to accurate scientific information on the harms and risks associated with euthanasia and drug use.
I really wouldn't have a huge problem with the filter if all it was censoring was child porn information, and this could be done effectively. But the proposed filter plan goes so far beyond this.
I don't think there's much public awareness out there about how information on euthanasia, harm minimization etc.., will be restricted under the internet filter, and those opposing the filter would be more successful if they tried to explain the filter in these terms and appeal to peoples value and respect for free speech regarding these issues.