
Someone defines something as unwanted (like Australian government, etc), and decides that it is unwanted for anyone to see a pair of tits, complain about the government or anything else that some elite group decides is unwanted, and it is censored.
Unwanted is a very nice term, because it depends entirely on the person (or persons) who are enforcing it, point of view. Which means when the government changes, so does the censored list, and it is not a large stretch of the imagination to see that anti-government sites quickly appearing on the list.
No Democratic government should ever be able to levie censorship, nor to control censorship, as that is a huge breech of all democratic principles, and principles of freedom.
I also don't care who defines what is unwanted, whether it is a Priest, Politicians, Psychologists, et. al. No one should have the right to tell an adult what they can and cannot read, or see, be it movies, websites or pornography. I find it quite demeaning that such thoughts of control exists in society. Any adult is capable of choosing what is not appropriate, but no adult should decide what other adults should find appropriate.
However, there are limits to free speech, such as inciting murder, libel, or violence, and thus anyone who publishes materials are subject to laws, and thus it is the publisher who must answer to the law, this means if someone can prove something is a lie (libel), or otherwise illegal, then it is up to the courts to decide if any laws are broken, and prosecute the publisher accordingly,.
The benefit of using the courts is that there isn't any secrecy about what is happening, everything is open and can be audited by the general public, and groups, which means, if someone is trying to block anti-government or constructive critisme of eg. Religion. Best of all, in the case of Child abuse, the abuse is stopped, and not just hidden.
That is the focus needs to be on curing the disease, and not hiding the symptoms. Shutting down sites, and the producers - is curing the disease - censorship is a poor band aid on the symptoms of the disease, and has a tendency to be abused by those in power, to cover other things (defined as unwanted).
The wish to prevent child abuse is admirable, and a noble cause, however, I have yet to see any real efforts in preventing child abuse, I have seen censorship, being presented as a solution, however the only effect of censorship, is that the whole nasty business is driven underground, and hidden from public view. Unfortunately these measures do not reduce the number of children being abused, it just hides it from the public eye.
The current emphasis on child porn may also have a significant dark side, which is the inability of people with certain tendencies (or afflictions), to ask for help, and to receive treatment. This aspect concerns me, as it might - as with all addicts - cause an unending cycle, where they are unable to break out, and keep going for the bigger and bigger fix, but unlike other addicts they cannot ask for help, without their lives being destroyed, permanently. - Something to think about!