Opponents have typically argued that any action should focus on the people uploading the video, not the hosts, and that those most vulnerable to extremist material won't be deterred by blocks like this. A New Zealand man who shared a livestream video of the Christchurch mosque attacks has been jailed for 21 months. And of course, there are questions over whether or not the government should block sites in the first place. There are concerns this could lead to Australia blocking sites for content that exists in gray areas. Communications minister Paul Fletcher likewise said blocks didn't represent a "universal solution." This is specifically meant to combat material that's illegal in its own right - in this case, a video of horrible violence effectively crafted to spur further terrorist attacks.Įven so, it's unlikely to completely satisfy critics.
There's a "high threshold" and "parliamentary oversight" before blocking takes place, Inman said. Officials maintain that this won't lead to arbitrary censorship. Reviews for the blocks will take place every six months. The commissioner's office will also be responsible for keeping watch over the sites and will unblock them if they pull the video. The move comes after Prime Minister Scott Morrison (above) told both Inman and ISPs to create a protocol for ordering these blocks. The government's e-safety commissioner Julie Inman has ordered internet service providers in the country to block eight websites hosting the Christchurch terrorist's video, preventing Australians from visiting the sites unless they use alternatives like VPNs. Australia isn't waiting for new laws to block access to sites with content it deems horrific. Christchurch Shooting Live Leakknown for hosting gruesome footage that mainstream rivals wouldnt touch, has shut down after fifteen years in operation.
0 kommentar(er)
