The right to YouTube

There is only one place on the web you visit if you want to see the latest internet-made celebrities, teary supporters of Britney Spears and Kevin Rudd parodied as Chairman Mao—YouTube of course.

YouTube is the world’s largest and most popular video sharing website. There are millions of YouTube users, aka YouTubers, worldwide. The site is a one stop shop for the latest movie trailers, news clips and DIY short films.

However YouTube is more than a passing internet fad. It has become a platform for free speech. Video bloggers use YouTube as a means of broadcasting their opinions to the world. It encourages participative democracy, where all citizens actively engage in debate and contribute to a democratic system that checks government power.

In October, an Australian version of YouTube was launched allowing Aussie YouTubers to create and share videos, search and view relevant Australian videos, and connect with other Australian users.

Yet some controversial clips on YouTube, such as those that depict schoolyard bullying, violent street attacks or that glamorise smoking, have attracted criticism. The problem of cyber-bullying was severe enough for the Victorian education department to ban YouTube access in all schools. Furthermore the large number of pro-cigarette smoking videos on YouTube has led anti-smoking campaigning organisations like Quit. to call for tobacco advertising laws to also apply to the internet.

In an effort to restrict such material, the Commonwealth Government will review current internet legislation. In light of this, online self-expression needs to be protected. In countries such as China, the internet is heavily censored with restricted Google searches and YouTube access. To avoid heavy-handed censoring of YouTubers, we need to be wary of new internet content constraints.

According to the Electronic Frontier Association (EFA), internet censorship in Australia is one of the most restrictive compared to other western democracies. The Australian Media and Communications Authority (ACMA) is the body responsible for regulating online content for internet service providers (ISP) and internet content hosts (ICH) like YouTube.

Currently, the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 (BSA) is the main piece of legislation that governs the internet. Material which is prohibited on the internet is rated RC (refused classification) and includes child pornography, excessive or sexual violence, detailed instructions for crime, violence or drug use and material that advocates a terrorist act. Also banned is X18+ material such as actual sexual activity. Any Australian ICH hosting RC or X18+ content may receive a take-down notice from ACMA or risk fines of $5500 per day for an individual and up to $27,500 per day for a corporation.

In June the Communications Legislation Amendment (Content Services) Bill 2007 was passed by federal parliament which builds on the BSA 1992. It will regulate fee-paid media on portable devices, such as mobile phones, and temporary content, like live-streamed content and interactive chat services, under the definition of prohibited material as outlined by the BSA 1992.

Following this bill and now being reviewed, a Restricted Access Systems Declaration has been proposed. It combines the regulation of access to age-restricted internet content with new online services like mobile phones and live streamed content under a single framework. This will mean that providers of hosting services, live content services, link services and commercial content services must have age restricted access if providing R18+ and MA15+ content. The Declaration could possibly regulate free video hosting sites like YouTube.

The EFA believes that the Australian population is fully capable of deciding what online material they wish to access and do not need government to provide ‘nanny-state’ censorship. Constraints also ignore the fact that access to international websites with RC or X18+ material is not always restricted.

The NSW Council for Civil Liberties holds a similar stance. They believe that a new legislatory framework governing internet content in Australia is required that protects children from inappropriate material but also the viewing rights of adults over 18.

At the moment, YouTube remains largely self-regulated by its users. Under the YouTube terms of agreement, material which is copyrighted by another individual or organisation and/or flagged as inappropriate by YouTubers is withdrawn from the website. However, the unique participatory medium of YouTube, has led to calls for a different approach to internet regulations.

Sonja Baumer, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of California at Berkeley studying political participation on YouTube, argues that YouTube should remain a community where users keep each other in check by deeming which material is appropriate.

‘YouTube is not just a company but also a community of users. And they should be allowed to negotiate criteria for censorship,’ Baumer said.

Also, YouTube provides a balance between issues and gives users the opportunity to see both sides of an argument. For every pro-smoking video on YouTube there are just as many anti-smoking videos.

It is clear that the internet has opened new forms of individual expression and opportunities for participatory democracy. This year’s federal election was dubbed the ‘YouTube Election’. As political parties rushed to launch new policies on their YouTube channels, citizens were just as quick to release video responses.

YouTube has allowed internet users, for the first time in history, to broadcast their views to an international audience. Increasing internet content restrictions on top of Australia’s stringent online services laws will only continue to curb the freedom of speech of YouTubers. Rather than censoring voices, we should be preserving the right to YouTube.

How do I know this?

Australian Media and Communications Authority, http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/LANDING/pc=INTERNET_MAIN  

ACMA 2007, 'ACMA proposes changes to internet and mobile content regulation', Media Release, 26 October, http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_310812  

Australia Privacy Foundation, 'Media release: Internet Censorship Bill', http://www.privacy.org.au/Media/MR-IntCens-070920.pdf  

Best, J 2007, ‘Australia further pushes web censorship’, ZDNet News, 21 September, http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6209337.html  

Dromberg J and Ben-Aaron, D 2007, ‘Finnish School Killer May Have Contacted U.S. Plotter Via Web’ Bloomberg, 10 November, http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=abCKhBogQza4&refer=home  

‘Election 07: Brought to you by YouTube’, ABC Radio National—Street Stories, 11 Nov 2007, http://www.abc.net.au/rn/streetstories/stories/2007/2080436.htm  
Electronic Frontier Australia, Internet censorship—law and policy throughout the world, http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/cens3.html#aust  

Electronic Frontier Australia, Submission for Inquiry into the provisions of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Content Services) Bill 2007, http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/ecita_ctte/
contentservices/submissions/sub05.pdf

Giles, D & Rankin, A 2007, ‘New Communications Legislation Amendment to impose obligations on commercial providers of non-broadcast media content’, Freehills, http://www.freehills.com.au/publications/publications_6859.asp 

Jordan, R 2002, ‘Free speech and the Constitution’, Law and Bills Digest Group, 4 June, http://www.aph.gov.au/LIBRARY/Pubs/RN/2001-02/02rn42.htm  

'Inquiry into the provisions of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Content Services) Bill 2007', Parliament of Australia—Senate, http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/
committee/ecita_ctte/contentservices/index.htm  

Moses, A 2007 ‘YouTube plugs local content’, The Age, October 23, http://www.theage.com.au/news/web/youtube-plugs-local-content/2007/10/23/1192941035807.html  

NSW Council for Civil Liberties, Submission for Inquiry into the provisions of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Content Services) Bill 2007, http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/ecita_ctte/
contentservices/submissions/sub03.pdf  

Osborne, D 2007, YouTube takes on Aussie Flavour, http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,22634568-31037,00.html  

Ricketson, M 2007, ‘Cyber democracy’, The Age, Oct 15, http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/cyberspace-democracy/2007/10/15/1192300613287.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap2  

Sandoval, G 2007, ‘Should YouTube play the censor and the sentinel?’, News.com, 9 November, http://www.news.com/Should-YouTube-play-the-censor-and-sentinel/2100-1025_3-6217712.html  

Weller, T 2006, ‘A Slippery Slope of Censorship at YouTube’, New York Times, 9 October, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/09/technology/09link.html?ex=1318046400&en=e391caf73c3cf102&ei=5088&partner=  

YouTube Australia http://au.youtube.com/t/community_guidelines  

Turtle, M 2007, ‘Pro-smoking “ads” target youth market on YouTube’, September 28, ABC News, http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2007/09/28/2045745.htm