The Censored Net
Wikileaks has released the secret Internet censorship list for Denmark. The list contains 3863 sites blocked by Danish ISPs participating in Denmark’s censorship scheme as of February 2008. Danish ISPs "volunteer" to censor their users rather than face legislation and the top three ISPs are participants. The system can be used to censor anything, but is meant to be for child pornography sites found by the Danish police and the Danish "Save the Children" group. The list is generated without judicial or public oversight and is kept secret by the ISPs using it. Unaccountability is intrinsic to such a secret censorship system. List like this also are in use in Sweden, Finland, Switzerland and Thailand and are planned for several other countries including Germany.
If you (dare to) click through the list you will realize that nearly all of the banned sites are legal, only a ridiculous small number of them are actually showing pictures which could be considered as child pornography. The Finnish list is pretty much the same as in Denmark and someone did the work of checking all sites for their actual content. Here are the results:
|
TYPE OF SITE |
LEGALITY |
NUMBER ( RATIO) |
|
completely irrelevant |
LEGAL |
9 (<1%) |
|
nothing to do with child porn |
LEGAL |
879 (84%) |
|
legal/clothed child models |
LEGAL |
46 (4-5%) |
|
small portion of questionable content |
HARD TO DEFINE |
28 (2-3%) |
|
contains child pornography |
ILLIEGAL |
9 (<1%) |
|
site is dead or not reachable |
X |
76 (7-8%) |
So: Less than 1% (!) of the sites on the list are containing child porn while nearly 25% are legal gay sites! And that’s where it gets dangerous: nobody can control the content of these censor list. Today there are banning legal gay sites, tomorrow they might ban sites of uncomfortable political groups (not so unrealistic since countries like Australia and New Zealand are already using anti-terror laws to spy on anti-war protestors and animal right groups).
[Found at DeviantArt]
German: Einen Deutschen Artikel zum Thema gibt’s bei Schutzalter, der Gründer von Wikileaks hat außerdem auf dem 25C3 einen Vortrag gehalten den man hoffentlich bald runterladen kann. Ich poste den Link in den Kommentaren sobald das Video online ist.
Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing, and pictures and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship. – German Basic Law, Article 5
about 1 year ago
Out of sheer curiosity I checked about 20 randomly selected URL’s to see if the ISP that I am currently signed on to (a Belgian one) would also be blocking them… Only *1* came through (and that one happened to be one that I would call “questionable” to be honest); all others were either redirected to a seach site, or produced a 404-error.
I think Belgium can be added to the censorship-list :-(
about 1 year ago
I just randomly checked out a few of the links all of which worked, but just read on the wikileaks discussion board that bredbandsbolaget (which is the swedish ISP provider I use) has 2823 of the 3862 sites censored.
Not only do I feel it infringes on our democratic rights on principle but I also can’t help but feel it’s counter productive. Hardly any of the sites contained illeagal content, which must mean that the real child pornography communities are still there just being driven deeper underground. And if we defend unjust means because we agree with certain opinions of the perpetrator we are on one hell of a slippery slope. And where do you think we’ll end up by supporting a system that is driven by unchecked power, fueled by fear and protected with silence?
I suppose as a private company (as I assume they are) they have a right to do what they do? Does anyone know what % of users these three ISP providers have and how many alternatives there are? What I’m getting at is-
Is there an alternative if I don’t agree with their policies?
(Policies that should def be out in the open for both public and judicial eyes)
Now if they were following on with that list (most of which was legal) you would end up banning every site containing porn and then some. This site would go. Now you want to ban porn? You believe this site should be illegal? Fine propose some legislation, vote on it. You believe I do wrong for visiting this site? Then charge me, state your case, let me state mine. That’s all fine but don’t take my rights away in silence.
(please excuse bad spelling, I’m growing up in the spellcheck era)
about 1 year ago
Woah…this is bad, very bad.
Sometimes I think the only way to stop all the observation and spying is to start a revolution and build a new world…but for that we would need not just some hundreds but millions of people…
about 1 year ago
Its amazing that they think they can control all of this stuff….even if it is illegal. Its just like drugs…it will always be there, no matter how minuscule.
Im glad, on the other hand, that they are trying to regulate it. It’s sites like this one where we can draw the line and appreciate the youth for what they really: beautiful and innocent. That’s how they should remain. They deserve it as much as we did.
Nice excerpt.
about 1 year ago
There’s too many assholes and pervs in this world, these are the ones to blame. Let’s face it, internet is a childmolester’s and terrorist’s (whatever the good cause they’re fighting for) heaven!
Maybe it’s time to go back to world without internet?! I still remember these days…
Earlier this evening, there was a program on Dutch tv about the number of children who need ‘psychological’ care cuz they’ve got trouble to get around in today’s world. The reason is basicly that they grow up too fast, internet certainly has a share.
Oh, well, these are just my thoughts…
about 1 year ago
When it comes to child pornography, I find it difficult to blame them for erring on the side of caution…and to say that minority political groups are next is a bit of an alarmist slippery-slope. Its the same type of flawed logic many people use to criticize same-sex marriage; “before you know it people will be marrying all eight of their sisters and the family dog!”
about 1 year ago
@MrChives
They DON’T DO ANYTHING against the people who ARE producing child porn. All they do is taking away OUR rights with the kill-it-all argument of child porn.
And alarmist slippery-slope? Certainly not. It IS happening. It was bad enough and it’s getting worse. Do you wanna tell me it’s child porn if a 17 years old boys takes pictures of his 17 years old girlfriend? Still you will be charged with production of child porn for this in the US. You’re not even a “child” if you’re older than 13.
And same goes for the so called “anti-terror” laws. We have dozens of these laws but we had not ONE terrorist attack in Germany for about 30 years. But they are using this laws to catch file-sharers and parking offenders -__-
about 1 year ago
“Do you wanna tell me it’s child porn if a 17 years old boys takes pictures of his 17 years old girlfriend?”
Not at all, no; that’s not the “slippery-slope” in question. I was referring to the proposition that the government would next be censoring certain political groups based purely on the evidence that they overextend themselves (as clearly they do) when child pornography is involved. Political involvement is far more important to me than porn, or pseudo-porn, or quasi-porn, or semi-porn, or whatever. To suggest that censorship of one will necessarily lead to that of the other really is somewhat alarmist. If the government discovered a brothel and shut it down, I would be both slightly amused and annoyed. If the government shut down a library, I would be extraordinarily pissed.
As for terrorist attacks, I wouldn’t necessarily expect Germany to suffer much from them. Germany seems to be nearly as critical of the North Atlantic alliance as anyone…
about 1 year ago
If only the internet was back to what it was like in when the internet took its first breath. It was when men were men, women were men, and children were FBI agents. (I’m 18, by the way).
about 1 year ago
sorry, mr chives but you didn’t get it. they won’t save the children by blocking websites. this won’t help anybody at all. it’s way to easy to get around it with a proxy.
just look back in time, it’s always the same, they tell you they need this and that because of –insert populist reason here– but they will use these laws to do everything but what it was intended for. that’s not hysteria but history. and it’s happening again.
as for germany: no, they don’t and they won’t suffer from that but still they’re becoming a police state with all their terror laws. that’s exactly the point.
about 1 year ago
to Mr Chives too: Germany does not suffer from terrorism. Yet. But do you remember the 1972 Olympic Games in München? Frage mal den Herr Kanzler Helmut Schmidt, was seine Meinung über Terrorismus ist! Was war die Roten Schmutz Fraktion? usw.
I understand that you are afraid from censorship, becouse government should controll you, you shall loose your privacy etc – but do you think that they could not do it whitout a legal act or law? Meinst Du dass wirklich, wenn die Gestapo (ich weiß nicht, wie die heutige Geheimpolizei heißt) nicht Seiten schlossen, Daten vernichten, E-mails lesen, jemanden überhören will, könnte sie nicht ohne Befehl oder Recht tun?
If they are allowed to take a care on the web, you claim for freedom. But if they do not conroll communication or others, you shall be the next victim. Remember the story of Madrirds Railwaystation (2004). You get on a train, and next station is the Heaven.
If you find the ballance, you will be the best politician. (sorry for Rechtschreibung:)
about 1 year ago
I have been waiting for someone to check these lists, and I was anticipating these results. It’s a shame this doesn’t make news. Thanks for reporting, Josh.
Oscar Swartz checked some of the links on the Swedish list in 2007, which makes for some fun reading in Swedish (the pictures of “sex tortured children” are pretty fun too):
http://swartz.typepad.com/texplorer/2007/07/polisen-vr-cens.html
The high percentage of gay sites is interesting, but no surprise – homophobia lurks behind the judgements of whoever decides what sites comes on the list. Since at least Sweden is “gay-crazy” nowadays, that homophobia could be used by anyone who cares about this issue and wants to criticize the censor lists. As for me, I’ve given up. *cynic*
about 1 year ago
The boy in the photo is so hot.
about 1 year ago
crashguy: Youth are “innocent”? Not the ones I grew up with, and not me, and not most of the ones I’ve met. I’m not sure protecting their “innocence” (which is often code for their “stupidity” or “inability to think for themselves”) is so important. I mean, there’s a long line between protecting their “innocence” and sexually violating them. (Or is there? If they’re too “innocent” to know what’s about to happen to them?)
about 1 year ago
Adelmus, et al.: Apparently words like “erring” and “overextended” failed to convey that I don’t support these measures; however, as we here have just demonstrated, this is a hot issue, and it involves some gray areas in the law.
As for Germany becoming a police state, I confess, living, as I do, in America, my utter ignorance on that point. Which leads me to my next issue;
Larione: Was that whole thing to me? I don’t speak German, so if it was, I can’t properly reply. As for the first bit in English, it was Josh who mentioned the lack of terrorism.
Josh: I just read the latest post (Goodbye), and am very sorry to hear it. Thanks for everything, I’ll miss coming here every day…
about 1 year ago
Josh, thanks for being one of the few people to talk about NZ’s current situation with the government recording peoples conversations. I would like to point out that New Zealand has recently regrettably changed over to a right-wing government.
Mr Chives, the link between banning legal gay websites and banning sites of political groups, the recent actions of the New Zealand government do make it an all too real possibility. They have been using the anti-terrorist laws passed in the wake of 9-11 to secretly record conversations of aforementioned political groups, including Greenpeace. Near the beginning of 2008 these same laws were also used to invade people’s homes and make numerous arrests. Is it not a reasonable view to think that these laws (which many countries have versions of) could also be used to ban these sites if they contained “objectionable content”?
The only event in the history of New Zealand that could be classified as “terrorist” was carried out by the French Secret Service.
about 1 year ago
To those that that say that it not a slippery slide are placing to much faith in government, if you give government the power to censor sites without any public oversight you are just begging for that system to be abused. At any rate people can easily by pass a lot of these measures and not even the great firewall of China blocks everything (although that’s not why they do it, unlike some western governments they aren’t stupid).
Most of these filters strike me as vote grubbing measures that play on people’s anxieties and fears of what they do not understand and hopefully that is all it is as opposed to something more sinister.
about 1 year ago
There is another point one shouldn’t miss: The more laws, the more fears… every new law limits our freedom because we might not do anything we could do just because we think we could do anything wrong.
I don’t know about other countries but the GERMAN BASIC LAW says:
Every person shall have the right freely to express and disseminate his opinions in speech, writing, and pictures and to inform himself without hindrance from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the press and freedom of reporting by means of broadcasts and films shall be guaranteed. There shall be no censorship.
about 1 year ago
This being the same document that forbids both the incitement of the people and the denial of Nazi crimes? Now, don’t take that to mean that I in any way support Nazi-ism, sympathize with Nazi-ism, or promote Nazi-ism. But the fact that a constitution can both forbid it and endorse it makes it very clear that censorship is a complex issue, which really has been my only point all along.
about 1 year ago
On a bit of an unrelated topic, the picture with this post is actually a girl… BellZ on DeviantART, look her up.
http://bellZ.deviantart.com
And she’s from Latvia.
It’s difficult to tell in this picture but in her more recent ones, it’s plainly obvious.
about 8 months ago
And Why Not…?