Anti-filter flash mob planned to raise Internet filter concerns

The 80% statistic from McNair/Hungry Beast needs to be understood in the context of the other questions in the poll. For example, 91% of respondents said that the list of filtered sites should be available for public scrutiny, but the Government is not planning to do that. 70% said they were concerned about the implications for free speech.

So it's not entirely right to say that 80% support mandatory filtering; by my rough reckoning, support in this poll for the specific Government proposal runs at about 6%. Or, at the very least, pro-filtering people who use this poll to show support for the Government filtering policy are mistaken.

Why do journalists wrongly assume that the 'public' is for the filter, based on a Hungry Beast incompetently phrased poll of @1,000, while the 'techs' are opposed to it. Whirlpool polled 23,000 members who range from hi tech experts to mums trying to work out how to download a tv show.

Prior to the HB joke even Sunrise polled thousands of lowest common denominator viewers of its vanilla milshake and despit Koss's pathetic popularist stupidity even they voted against the damn thing.

Get

Your

Facts

Right...

Duke - the poll is not incompetently phrased or otherwise invalid (aside from a legitimate question about the definition of RC that was used). It was conducted by professional pollsters who know what they are doing.

My argument is that it's been incorrectly interpreted by the media (see my comment above). I contend that the results are actually more useful to those who oppose the Government proposal than those who support it.

"Recent polls suggest that the filter scheme has widespread support in the general public yet vehement opposition in the IT industry."

thats funny. widespread support? as a matter of fact the HB poll is in the minority where the filter drew support - SMH/Age took a poll which returned figures very similar to the Whirlpool survey -23478 responses and 96% against the mandatory filter. (http://www.smh.com.au/polls/politics/form.html)

theres the whirlpool poll already covered, against the filter.

GetUp! commissioned another poll that found 95% support against. (dug through their site, couldnt find a link but this result has been widely reported)

ZDnet also reports 95% against. (http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/communications/soa/Do-you-support-a-mandatory-internet-filter-/0,130061791,339300077,00.htm)

mashable finds 76odd% moderately or strongly disagreeing with the filter (http://mashable.com/2007/12/31/australia-internet-censorship-poll/)

and i did not see the Sunrise poll myself but i understand it was heavily against as well - "upwards of 80% against" according to the vid here (http://www.somebodythinkofthechildren.com/video-efa-interview-on-channel-sevens-morning-show/)

thats one poll showing major support for and six with major support against: i would argue that really does not lend credence to the view that 'recent polls suggest ... support' for the policy - quite the opposite.

it took me twenty minutes of digging with google to get those links, btw. yes; each poll needs its own context but across the board and with such strong numbers - the lowest asides from HB being a touch over 3/4 of respondents *against* the filter, i have to wonder what it was about the HB poll that delivered such different results. i certainly would NOT be billing it as 'widespread support' in that light.

thanks