Should the government regulate the internet?
The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) has the power to enforce content restrictions on Internet content hosted within Australia, and maintain a "black-list" of overseas websites which is then provided for use in filtering software. The restrictions focus primarily on child pornography, sexual violence, and other illegal activities, compiled as a result of a consumer complaints process. In 2009, the OpenNet Initiative found no evidence of Internet filtering in Australia, but due to legal restrictions ONI does not test for filtering of child pornography.
@9HK9YD6 4mos4MO
The legs of humans increased wears of squad gears for inline police policy and by legend former US president Donald Trump and former UK prime minister Boris Johnson hoping use straight wings leaders
@9G5JY2T6mos6MO
Dependant on the nature of what is being searched for (e.g. child pornography, terrorist groups, sex trafficking etc.)
@9G4L49S6mos6MO
No they should not regulate the end user, but they should enact legislation to protect citizens data
@9FWVPBS6mos6MO
Again, a yes or no response is inadequate. I don't want the current digital wild west but neither do I want a China approach in which regulation is strict censorship which allows the population only what its government wants it to have. This requires considerable thought before finding the sweet point on the continuum between a wild west and state control of information.
Yes, in order to reduce misinformation and disinformation, to prevent child pornography and exploitation, to prevent cyberbullying , and to stop copyright infringement
@9FQBSG46mos6MO
only in the circumstances of a serious global crime
Yes, to prevent child pornography and sex trafficking.
@9FJY7Z56mos6MO
Yes and ban child pornography completely
Yes, but only to prevent child pornography and other major harms
I don't think it's the government's role to regulate the internet, but it would be better to have process by which they can engage with social media companies to address misinformation
Complex issue requiring more policy development
The government should keenly monitor for high risk, such as child pornography and calls to violence.
Yes, but only for things like terrorism and sexual abuse etc
Yes, remove that which documents criminal acts and block known scam sites.
@9DZ5MLJOpportunities7mos7MO
Yes, only to prevent misinformation
@9DY4XFY7mos7MO
Yes, but only for serious illegal activity such as trafficking, child porn etc
@9DY2V5R7mos7MO
I think the government should educate people on fake posts an recognising scams
Social media corporations should be regulated to monitor what happens on their platforms without infringing on individual liberties and privacy. They should be sanctioned for not upholding these standards.
@9DW644N7mos7MO
Yes but only to stop child oorn and abuse across the board
Social media companies should be required to monitor their platforms in a way that doesn't conflict with individual liberties. This includes the sanctioning of corporate entities that fail to uphold these online standards.
@9DSYQX5New Zealand First7mos7MO
No, that is a stupid decision to make
@9DPH5P67mos7MO
Yes, but only to prevent child pornography, trafficking and other serious cases (not copyright infringement, which is no where near as serious or affecting as trafficking or child pornography and shouldn't be lumped in as being viewed as important in society).
@9DLJYWD7mos7MO
Yes, but we should ban the Internet and establish a intranet system.
@9DFHCYC7mos7MO
By "regulate the internet," I was meaning net neutrality, not censorship. Yes, criminal activity should be censored but I think the internet needs to be regulated in terms of ISPs having to provide equal bandwidth to all websites to prevent monopolies.
@9DD5BB27mos7MO
Yes, the internet with it’s current status is a haven for extremist groups that can easily recruit people who are struggling
@9DCRF2X7mos7MO
Child Porngraphy and adult porngraphy should be removed from all platforms
@9BZXY4Z11mos11MO
No, and only for truly illegal content, not copyright infringement
@9BNTH3211mos11MO
Yes, for objectionable material and websites which fail to comply with NZ law in a way deemed socially harmful (for example, this could be used to block pornography websites which do not require age verification to view) . Furthermore, all ISPs should be required to offer multiple filter/safety options to consumers, such as website blacklisting/blocking at the entry point (e.g. for institutions), parental/admin password access for home environments, parental monitoring options or status quo open access.
@99YGYDQ1yr1Y
Yes, but only in regards to the law.
@99RWY941yr1Y
Yes, but only to prevent child abuse and serious crime
@99JJ5GS1yr1Y
Yes, but only for pornography and things which break the law.
@99GF7S21yr1Y
Yes, but only to prevent illegal activities such as the publication of child pornography, drug dealing, weapons and human trafficking.
@996226W1yr1Y
Don't be silly - how could they do more than filter NZ use.
@992KJGL1yr1Y
The Government must play a role in preventing criminal activity on the internet-especially with regards to child predators. The Government must also ensure that misinformation, disinformation as well as offensive, discriminatory, demeaning, defamatory, divisive, destructive and abusive filth does not harm and intoxicate society.
@98ZQHW51yr1Y
No, limitations on free platforms will make threats harder to identify and people should be able to freely express themselves even if we disagree with the expression. Harmful websites could be managed but it could bring into question the justification for the limitations of each site.
@95KSND52yrs2Y
No, any regulations should be carried out by police investigation or the relevant ministry for copyright infringement. Government should be treated the same as any other New Zealander when submitting complaints to either of these independent agencies.
@8G5SJKR3yrs3Y
Again, Government have more important things to focus on
@8FR34SS3yrs3Y
Yes but only to prevent child pornography and other abusive materials
@8CMYGHF4yrs4Y
No, but with allowances for intervention in child pornography situations.
@8CGF7JX4yrs4Y
Yes, but only to monitor child pornography and trafficking.
@8CF4X8R4yrs4Y
It should be regulated by an independent authority based on scientific research.
@8BZF2GM4yrs4Y
@9DDN8397mos7MO
No, that's a stupid decision
@9DD7S7K7mos7MO
Yes, but only for child pornography, nothing else
Only for illegal material
@9D93TBL8mos8MO
Yes but only for child pornography, terrorism and scams
@9D4TSBV8mos8MO
Definitely to look for dark web activity with real victims such as child or trafficked victim porn, drug and arms dealing, cyber warfare, disinformation troll farms etc.
Yes, to monitor the rise of misinformation and hate speech.
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...