Wikipedia yanks ACMA censored link
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- A link to the Australian Communications and Media Authority blacklisted web site that lasted over 24 hours in the ACMA’s Wikipedia entry has been deleted.
The link was inserted into ACMA’s Wikipedia entry by a campaigner against Internet filtering to see ifAustralia’s communications regulator, “had a double-standard when it came to censoring web content,” says IT News.
The link took people to a site, “containing graphic imagery of aborted foetuses,” says the story, going on the link, “inserted in a post on broadband forum Whirlpool, motivated ACMA to serve the forum’s hosting company Bulletproof Networks a ‘link deletion notice’ and the threat of an $11,000 fine”.
Wikipedia admin Nunh-huh deleted the link first and warned users not to “misuse Wikipedia by using it to tweak the nose of your local censor.”
It then went up and down, up and down, until, “Finally, an editor posting under the name ‘SoWhy’ protected the page, disallowing any further edits until March 25, citing ‘excessive vandalism’ and ‘disruption to prove a point’,” says IT News, adding:
“Interestingly, the link still seems to have slipped in at the bottom of ACMA’s page, listed as a ‘prohibited link’.”
It was still there when we went for a look at 9:29 AM Pacific, and wished we hadn’t.
IT News – Wikipedia removes ACMA-censored link, March 19 , 2009
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
March 19th, 2009 at 2:34 pm
“It was still there when we went for a look at 9:29 AM Pacific…”
Excuse me while I laugh at the utter incompetence of some people.
March 21st, 2009 at 11:04 am
Picture 1 and 3 look very, very animated to me
March 21st, 2009 at 10:42 pm
Jon wrote: “[...]and wished we hadnât.”
but that is your own choice if you wish to visit it or not. And it should be your own full responsibility to decide.
It should NOT be the choice of some censor guy in some (governmental) organisation for you to decide what you should be able to see or not see if you choose to do so contrary to his moral beliefs or his understanding of what is tasteless or not.
BTW is abortion legal in australia?
If so, it should not be illegal to show the “results” of such a law in my opinion.