Anyone that has been following my Twitter may have noticed my disgust in the proposed internet filter that Senator Stephen Conroy is trying to introduce into parliament. For the uninformed, I will try to break it down simply.

The Australian government want to introduce a mandatory internet filter with the intention of blocking out "Refused Classification" material. To the uninformed person; this gives the false impression that this filter will block out material that would be deemed unfit for viewing of minors e.g. porn and violence. This is not the case. The intention of the filter is to block “Refused Classification” material, now those two words are the main issue in the whole uproar and debate that has been surrounding this controversial policy.

“Refused Classification” in Australia is material that the classification board deem inappropriate for viewing by the public. Things that fall under this classification are the usual suspects such as child pornography and bestiality but also more controversial topics such as euthanasia.

This is what people are having the problem with; the definition of refused classification is quite large. The problem lies with such a large scope of material that can be blocked, where is the line drawn? What happens if a site is published that contains potential damaging information about the workings of a political party? Will this filter then be used to prevent the Australian public from finding out what is on the site? Stephen Conroy has mentioned the list of sites can be viewed by a retired judge ^[link] , but what is stopping someone within the government paying off this judge?

So getting back to the point as to why I am writing this blog today! I was in the newly open JB HiFi in Bendigo when in the DVD section I passed this:

What you can see above are two boxed sets of Fawlty Towers. One is the original release boxed set from 2003 and the other is was re-released in 2009.

Now can someone please explain to me how Fawlty Towers can go from being a PG rated show to an M rated show in the space of 6 years? It’s inconsistencies like this that make me even more concerned with what Stephen Conroy is trying to introduce. If the government office for classification can give the same show two different ratings what chance do we have if all the websites that we view need to be classified?