Do governments have a duty to censor internet content?

[Dave A]

I see Australia is currently grappling with an internet censorship debate. But in the midst of it all, this little part caught my eye:

But chair of the Australian Privacy Foundation, Roger Clarke said it was the role of parents and guardians, not the government, to protect children from inappropriate material.

"It's not the government's business to control information flows," he said.

"That's the kind of thing that goes on in oppressive countries, in authoritarian countries.

"That's not what the government is there to do."
extracted from M&G article here

So is Roger Clarke right? Is it the responsibility of parents and guardians to protect minors from inappropriate material, or must government take a role?

[Chatmaster]

This is dangerous territory we are treading on. IMO government has absolutely no reason to censor the internet. So my answer is short and sweet, NO!

[IanF]

So my answer is short and sweet, NO!

I agree with chatmaster, look at age restrictions on movies they make no sense so how are you going to censor the net. Submit changes to the government to OK then publish something else. It is impractical.

[Chatmaster]

One thing is for sure. The day will come that governments will interfere. The Internet has a powerful future and they will have no choice if they want to further utilize their positions to get more kickbacks. There are several institutions that will be in serious trouble if they do not interfere.

I want to ask the following questions...
Does the SABC have a future? Mmmmmmm, let me see... I can watch tv on the Internet already without their biased ruling party propaganda...
Does Newspapers (printed media) have a future? Well, those that are biased has no future on the Internet, because the Internet tend to sort them out.
Radio stations?
Gambling Industry?
What other industries can you think of where ruling parties has a stake in it and the Internet is a serious threat to it! The reality is that somewhere one of the leaders will ensure that they get power over the Internet. They usually go the "moral values" route, or like recently in the US, country security and safety route, just to get what they want. But at the end the day, we as the public that are grown, mature people should take our own decisions and take responsibility for our own actions.

[Dave A]

The internet is really a whole new social order.

It is the ultimate vehicle for freedom of speech.
It is the ultimate vehicle for freedom of choice.
It is a country without borders - other than language maybe and even that is breaking down as online translators improve.

It is true freedom!
The price? Personal responsibility.

Governments may try to impose their will on their citizens, but it is as futile as the Berlin wall. There is a culture being born here that I think will prove to be an unstoppable force over time.

[Debbiedle]

The price? Personal responsibility.

My 14 year old had to remind an adult that laws don't breed morals and respect, (re: the u16 kissing law) people do. As individuals we are being censored and legislated to death (worldwide) Our freedom and hence the level of personal responsibility is being curbed daily, yet at the same time we are suggesting that our youth should step up.

As adults we should be nurturing a nation of open minded UNCONDITIONALLY RESPECTFUL children. If a person has respect for another he will not tolerate abuse of that person in any form and thus nullify the ostensible reasons governments offer as a justification for censorship.

My take on this is therefore simple. IF governments are really out there to HELP the people, start with FREE and abundant parenting classes, pay a huge amount of attention to the schools, invest in creating community centers that develop and encourage emotional intelligence. Invest in good quality educators and put more emphasis on the educators recognising all forms of intelligence and not only IQ.

Instead they want to try an monitor something as large and uncontrollable as the internet, they want to prosecute the person viewing the porn rather than the one producing or acting in the porn. Surely the latter are easily identifiable - why not simply legislate maximum sentence (or death) for these people?

The issue with government censorship is that it could start with child pornography because it is for the good of the people, it can then move on to other pornography because it is for the good of the people, it can also move on to certain religious cults and sects, for the good of the people of course and so we continue.......

And do not think that this type of censorship thinking is unique to Australia or China and will not happen in sunny ZA, it already has during the rule of the Nationalist Party - it was simply a different medium being censored at the time.