Note: On 23 February, the day after this article was first published, Whirlpool stated that the results released in this article did not constitute the final survey results. They were computed for a specific purpose before the Whirlpool survey closed.

Early results from broadband information site Whirlpool‘s annual survey have found that 91.8 percent of respondents do not support the idea of mandatory internet filtering, with most believing the government should focus on educating parents and children instead.

In total, some 21,755 people responded to the survey, which is held each year and is seen as a key indicator to the opinions and internet usage patterns of technically proficient Australians and early technology adopters. The full results of the survey, which covers a range of other issues such as hardware usage and experiences with ISPs, are expected to be published soon. Delimiter has gained early access to the filter section of the survey only.

The 91.8 percent figure has risen since the last survey in early 2009, which showed that 88.9 percent of the 19,763 respondents at that stage would opt out of a filter if given the option.

This year’s result echoes similar polls conducted last year by the Sydney Morning Herald and ZDNet.com.au. 96 percent of the 24,378 respondents to an online SMH poll stated they believed the filtering plan was not a good idea and impinged on their freedom, while 96.6 percent of the 1746 respondents in the ZDNet.com.au survey stated the government was completely wrong on the policy.

However, a survey recently commissioned by the ABC’s Hungry Beast program appeared to show that 80 percent of respondents supported the filter, prompting strong discussion online about the poll.

Whirlpool’s survey this year showed that only 3.2 percent of respondents believed the Government should focus on mandatory internet filtering as an online safety technique.

Instead, 81.8 percent and 63.9 percent believed the Government should focus on respectively educating parents and children, 43.7 percent on law enforcement, 42.1 percent on desktop filter software and 33.5 percent on subsidising ISP-level opt-in filters.

Concerns remain
Whirlpool also queried respondents on what negative and positive results might come from the filtering initiative. The results:

• 90 percent believed the filter might overblock/restrict access to legitimate information
• 86.6 percent believed it may give parents a false sense of security
• 82.5 believed the system could be abused by future governments
• 78 percent believed it may reduce internet performance
• 67.4 percent believed it might reduce internet performance
• And 53.6 percent believed it might make the internet less reliable

In terms of positive results, only 32.2 percent and 40 percent of respondents to the Whirlpool survey believed the filter would respectively protect children from harm and restrict access to child pornography. 23.1 percent believed it would restrict access to other “criminal material”, while 9.3 percent believed it would “protect me from visiting inappropriate sites”. 8.6 percent believed it would reduce crime in general.

The internet filtering issue also appeared set to change voting patterns at the next Federal election, with 44 percent of respondents stating the issue would be a “key factor” in their voting decision, and 39.4 percent stating the issue could affect their vote, but not at the expense of other issues. 14.2 percent stated it would not affect their vote, while the remainder, 2.4 percent, were not eligible to vote.

Demographics
Criticism of Whirlpool survey results in the past has focused on the idea that the site’s user base is slanted towards the technically proficient. And there is a demonstratable slant in that direction — the most popular careers by far listed by respondents were in the IT sector — either as managers or IT admins, developers, or support officers.

Overall, 32.5 percent of respondents to Whirlpool’s survey listed their role as being IT staff of some sort, with a further 3.2 percent working in the telecommunications sector. However, virtually ever other sector was also represented in the survey’s demographics, with popular choices being government (4.7 percent), engineering/oil/mining (4.7 percent) and healthcare/medical (2.7 percent).

The age of the respondents reflected a broad spread among the ages below 50, although respondents aged 17 or younger were excluded from participating. The rest responded as follows:

• 18 to 21 years of age: 11.4 percent
• 22 to 25 years of age: 16.6 percent
• 26 to 30 years of age: 18.2 percent
• 31 to 40 years of age: 24.7 percent
• 41 to 50 years of age: 13.9 percent
• 51 or older years of age: 15.2 percent

33.8 percent listed their technical proficiency as “guru”, with a further 38.3 percent and 23.5 percent saying they were respectively a “power use” or “confident” with technology. Only 4.1 percent described their technical proficiency level as “still learning” and just 0.3 percent (only 70 people) said they were a beginner.

Image credit: Maciek PELC, royalty free

Related posts:

1. Whirlpool users support NBN opt-out policy
2. Whirlpool founder slams internet filter
3. 2010 Whirlpool survey focuses on the NBN
4. Filter: Parents object more when they know more
5. Scrap the NBN to pay for floods: 28 percent say “Yes”

Tweet

1. Renai LeMay
   Posted 22/02/2010 at 8:46 am | Permalink | Reply

   hey Hans,

   that’s the common complaint leveled against the Whirlpool survey data, and I noted it in the article. However, I think the data is still statistically important, as it gives a strong indication into what users who are technically proficient (and therefore understand the technology behind the filtering proposal) think of it.

   There’s nothing wrong with publishing the results of a survey into a certain base, if you acknowledge what the demography of that base is.

2. Anonymous
   Posted 22/02/2010 at 9:52 am | Permalink | Reply

   Yes, potheads technically proficient dope fiends are. Disjointed from reality of wide public opinion as Whirlpool respondents, too.

3. Steve
   Posted 22/02/2010 at 12:46 pm | Permalink | Reply

   ““92 percent of Whirlpool users against filter”

   In other late breaking news:

   # 92 percent of religious conservatives are against gay marriage
   # 92 percent of union bosses are against Work Choices
   # 92 percent of metalheads are against Rick Astley”

   Fair enough, now lets see, who would you ask about gay marriage? Maybe if we ask the gay people about it we would get 100% for. The point is not that you ask a known biased group about a subject, but that you ask a group with knowledge about a subject for thier opinions. You wouldn’t ask a group of IT techs about about the school curriculum, but I guess you would ask a group of school teachers. The whirlpool user base isn’t a known biased group, it contains christians, muslims, housewives, gamers, a wide spread of the population in fact, its main bias is that it is a technically knowledgeable group,which shouldn’t immediately rule it out as a good testing ground for technical and IT questions.

4. Steven Noble
   Posted 22/02/2010 at 12:57 pm | Permalink | Reply

   I’m not doubting the passion of most Whirlpool members and the expertise of a large minority.

   I’m just saying that as far is headlines go, this one was closer to “dog bites man” than “man bites dog”.

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_bites_dog_(journalism)

5. CY
   Posted 22/02/2010 at 2:50 pm | Permalink | Reply

   I don’t like the way Conroy and his mob are selling this policy to the general public, and I don’t really know why they are persisting with this course of action – they’re misleading them into what it’s really all about.

   Those who *do* understand the internet know it will have little effect and/or won’t work the way it’s being advertised – it will just become a political tool for the government of the day to use to their advantage.

   Those who *don’t* understand the internet hear the emotive words/phrases “pornography”, “filter” and “protect the children” and naturally they’ll think its a good idea – without actually realizing what it will actually do, possibly lulling parents into a false sense of security and not bothering to install their own filter software such as NetNany or CyberPatrol. No wonder 80% in ABC’s poll were in favor of the filter.

6. paleoflatus
   Posted 23/02/2010 at 10:57 am | Permalink | Reply

   I’d be quite happy with the government filtering internet data, as long as they also forced Australia Post to open, read and censor our snail-mail.

   Of course, the Australian public would have to approve.

   • Bob Bobington
     Posted 23/02/2010 at 12:20 pm | Permalink | Reply

     How about a correct AusPost comparison.

     Lets say the Government has decided to filter mail order abdominal machines because they are a scam. Great. How would said filter work?

     Australia Post will have a machine, the same machine that scans the address on the envelope and sorts the mail to intended destinations, with no slowdowns at all.
     When you send a letter, 100% of the time it gets sorted and sent to the destination without it being opened, read, or delayed.

     However, should you write the address of mail order warehouse – known (to the government) to deal with abdominal machines – on your envelope, it then gets set aside to be further checked.
     If your letter has been put aside, it will be opened and checked for the words “abs” “abdominal” or other words to describe an abdominal machine. If no such words are found, your letter is resealed and sent on its way, so at this step there might be a slightly perceivable delay.

     If you did order an “ab cruncher 2000 cyclonic turbo ultra plus”, your letter gets dropped into the shredder accidentally on purpose. No one photocopies your letter, no one memorises your letter, the government does not send men in suits to your door.

     Now you can see how it is easy to bypass. Send your letter to a third party who is not subject to the filter, and they can on-send your “ab blaster” order.

     I don’t object to a government filter. I would like to see it setup with an Opt-Out ability and / or The list of RC URL’s made publicly available.

7. Steve
   Posted 23/02/2010 at 11:59 am | Permalink | Reply

   “Members never see photos of the apparently reclusive owner, but are expected to accept the “benign dictator” model of Whirlpool.”

   Whirlpool is a privately owned forum, or course its a dictatorship, the owner controls it, would you have him forced to do what YOU want? Life isn’t like that.

   “Whirlpool rules even forbid discussion of the so-called “moderation” process with other members in on-line forums; ‘

   Oh dear, the best you can do? This is in common with most other forums I have been a member of and even been a moderator on, you are NEVER allowed to discuss moderators decisions on the public forum of any discussion forum I have been a member of.

   “Whirlpool is a place where members are encouraged to “applaud” ISPs & convince each other that the latest -limited- Internet plans are worthy of note and/or hours of discussion”

   I can see you’ve never been onto the Bigpond page at the forum, practically every day the entire first page is filled with complaints about Bigpond, hardly what I call applauding!

   “A telling example (which also provides evidence for our first point (about the unrepresentative sample) is that not all Whirlpool members are sufficiently “privileged” to comment on its “In the New” forum; in particular, new members are unable to see that (& and several other forums) at all.”

   Quite common, a reward for being along time member, and I can assure you they are very similar to the general forums. I have been a “privileged” member of other discussions forums also.

   “There is no Whirlpool forum in which to discuss Politics, as if there weren’t any political aspects of the issues raised in other Whirlpool forums…”

   Whirlpool is a private forum and the rules are basically the same as most other forum’s, the “owner” of the discussion forum is entitled to decide what subjects people are allowed to discuss by setting up specific subject forums and rules of acess, I don’t really see what you are complaining about. The internet is, at the moment, free, you may come and go as you please, I assure you that there is no compulsion to actually visit Whirlpool.

   “We feel that the very group, whose views on filtering have being reported in this article, are knowingly experiencing a filtered community – ie, Whirlpool itself!”

   Would you care to identify the WE you are discussing? No, I don’t really care who you are, but think about freedoms for while, you are free to keep your identity secret, yet would like to compel the owner of Whirlpool, a private place on the net, into full disclosure.

   To sum it up, Whirlpool is a “private” place where the owner sets the rules of behaviour, people gravitate to places that have rules they sympathise with, would you have the government mandate that all forums MUST follow a set layout and rule system and MUST allow (or disallow) certain discussions etc etc. This attitude seems strange, at one stage you support the freedom of the internet, and at another you desire to compel Whirlpool to follow a set of rules that you would prefer.

   While I agree with you on some of the things you say about governments I disagree strongly on what you seem to feel is “freedom.” You are free to NOT go back to Whirlpool.

8. Reads Like A Troll.
   Posted 23/02/2010 at 1:33 pm | Permalink | Reply

   User #10 • 9213 posts
   Simon Wright
   is the
   Benevolent Dictator
   :( :| :) :D

   The numbers that Delimiter have are incorrect.

   herring | anchor
   Reply to this post | Send whim
   posted 6 minutes ago (around lunchtime)

9. Me
   Posted 23/02/2010 at 1:58 pm | Permalink | Reply

   The numbers that Delimiter have are incorrect.

10. Simon Wright
    Posted 23/02/2010 at 1:58 pm | Permalink | Reply

    renai said: “There’s nothing wrong with publishing the results of a survey into a certain base”

    There is if you don’t have permission to publish private information.

    • Renai LeMay
      Posted 23/02/2010 at 3:28 pm | Permalink | Reply

      hey Simon,

      the Whirlpool survey results were provided to me by an individual who assured me that you had given permission for the information to be dispersed to the media.

      Happy to discuss if you feel we’ve gotten something wrong etc, either drop me a line at renai@delimiter.com.au or on 02 8011 4539.

      Cheers,

      Renai

      • Simon Wright
        Posted 23/02/2010 at 7:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

        A note stating that the figures you’ve provided are not the ones which will be in the final report is sufficient, given the cat’s out of the bag. (Thanks, EFA!)

        • Renai LeMay
          Posted 23/02/2010 at 9:57 pm | Permalink | Reply

          No worries. Have put a note on the article to reflect this fact.

11. heisdeadjim
    Posted 23/02/2010 at 2:14 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Methinks you’ve fallen for a canary trap :p

12. Simon Wright
    Posted 23/02/2010 at 2:37 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Methinks journalists will publish anything to get traffic, i.e. advertising revenue. The internet’s advertising model (where revenue is tied to an article and not an entire issue) is destroying the journalistic integrity of online bloggers like delimiter.

    • Renai LeMay
      Posted 23/02/2010 at 3:25 pm | Permalink | Reply

      hey Simon,

      not sure that the advertising issue would affect either Whirlpool or Delimiter — neither site actually has advertising on it. But I’m always open to debating issues of journalistic integrity and so on — one of my favourite past-times in the wee hours of the morning with a few beers ;)

      Let me know if you think I’ve gotten something wrong!

      Cheers,

      Renai

13. Reads Like A Troll.
    Posted 23/02/2010 at 3:41 pm | Permalink | Reply

    My Sister friend gave me a copy of the source code of the next Microsoft OS and guess what, it’s open source, can you believe it !!

    I’m going to post it on my blog.

14. Jimmy H
    Posted 27/01/2011 at 9:23 am | Permalink | Reply

    Simon, lets talk about the integrity of using sign up data of those who visit your site to harass or stalk them shall we.

    Lets talk integrity. Lets talk about “ghost” accounts. Lets talk about cash for comment. Lets talk about sponsors, who are yours?

    92% of people are against being cyber-stalked.
    How about we question why using this data to track someone down is acceptable.

    Integrity, you make me laugh.

15. Hans Olo
    Posted 22/02/2010 at 8:37 am | Permalink | Reply

    Like asking potheads if dopelaws revoked should be.

16. Steven Noble
    Posted 22/02/2010 at 9:02 am | Permalink | Reply

    “92 percent of Whirlpool users against filter”

    In other late breaking news:

    # 92 percent of religious conservatives are against gay marriage
    # 92 percent of union bosses are against Work Choices
    # 92 percent of metalheads are against Rick Astley

    You get my point…

17. Hans Olo
    Posted 22/02/2010 at 9:52 am | Permalink | Reply

    Ooops name wrong there oh well I should get off the greens…

18. David Banes
    Posted 22/02/2010 at 4:08 pm | Permalink | Reply

    I’ve kept out of this debate for the last couple of years for a couple of reasons, 1) I was on the board of the IIA and we were fighting VERY hard to kill this, 2) I run a SaaS email and web filtering business :)

    Now I’m off the IIA Board I have this to say.

    But the thing that scares me most about this is Conroy using countries like China as examples of how the technology and policy works, forget the fact that we’re stuck with the filter, start worrying about the fact that our government thinks it’s OK to run Australia like China…

19. Anonymous
    Posted 23/02/2010 at 10:58 am | Permalink | Reply

    > Hans Olo
    > Posted 22/02/2010 at 8:37 am
    > Like asking potheads if dopelaws revoked should be.

    Actually hans, it’s more like asking potheads whether all drugs, including antibiotics, should be banned to prevent illicit drug use. It doesn’t matter what potheads think — it would affect the general population without curbing illicit drug use.

    We live in a society that places great value in free speech. Uncensored internet access is an important part of free speech.

    I am strongly opposed to child pornography, but the censorship scheme proposed by the current government will not prevent child pornography.

20. Wei, Chou-Ke
    Posted 23/02/2010 at 11:04 am | Permalink | Reply

    Whirlpool members certainly do NOT represent a representative sample of the Australian population.

    They tend to be technically oriented.

    The Whirlpool owner-dominated organisation seems FAR from democratic or democratically run.

    Members never see photos of the apparently reclusive owner, but are expected to accept the “benign dictator” model of Whirlpool. I suspect he’s a civil servant, whose [Commonwealth gov't] employer is impressed by Whirlpool’s way of “self-censorship” (if only it were so.

    Whirlpool itself operates under a rather harsh, arbitrary & anonymous mob of “hit men” (of members ideas, when expressed in their Whirlpool posts, not people, at this stage…), who:

    - prematurely “close” debate threads at whim,

    - arbitrarily delete or disable member-created polls,

    - move discussion / debate threads into “hidden” forums (eg, “In the News”), not available to all Whirlpool members, &

    - delete posts often without giving reason (despite the Whirlpool web app providing a mechanism to publish the reason for deletion, it may or may not be used, at the whim of the deleting moderator.

    Anonymous moderators’ photos or credentials are all hidden from other members. They are not elected by members, nor even randomly selected (as on SlashDot.org).

    The effect of their action is to limit discussions, at those time when ISPs or their plans are taken to task ‘too harshly” giving rise to the thought that ISPs’ support for Whirlpool has grown into commercial sponsorship.

    (We feel that the Australian Tax Office ought to regularly examine the books of Whirlpool’s “benign dictator” & – in the interest of Whirlpool members – a list of commercial “contributors & amounts of their contributions should be published on Whirlpool.)

    Whirlpool rules even forbid discussion of the so-called “moderation” process with other members in on-line forums; one can only try to begin to air the issue in a single forum, but threads there get closed before other non-moderating members have much time to discuss & debate underlying issues.

    (I am reminded of anti-terrorism laws that forbid the family of an arrested / detained family member from discussing their loss with press & others.)

    A telling example (which also provides evidence for our first point (about the unrepresentative sample) is that not all Whirlpool members are sufficiently “privileged” to comment on its “In the New” forum; in particular, new members are unable to see that (& and several other forums) at all.

    There is no Whirlpool forum in which to discuss Politics, as if there weren’t any political aspects of the issues raised in other Whirlpool forums…

    Whirlpool is a place where members are encouraged to “applaud” ISPs & convince each other that the latest -limited- Internet plans are worthy of note and/or hours of discussion, eg, comparing minutia of various ISPs’ plans… NONE of which are cheap, unlimited or fast, by world standards…

    (…while a world of Internet users – outside Auustralia – continue to enjoy cheap, fast, unlimited Internet plans…

    some also include phone + TV services, as well as HD multimedia hardware that can only bring tears to Australians’ eyes; see what AU $ 45.40 buys at:: http://Free.FR …it’s in French).

    We feel that the very group, whose views on filtering have being reported in this article, are knowingly experiencing a filtered community – ie, Whirlpool itself!

    They’re choosing to “live” in the filtered Whirlpool community (and many seem to spend a lot of time at Whirlpool), but declaring that they don’t want filtering of the larger Internet, in Australia.

    What a jumble of inconsistency that is!

    I’d say any poll of Whirlpool members’ opinions is even very likely to be skewed or biased in some way, and – in any case – cannot be held up as being representative of Australians’ views.

    Having said that… I am against Internet filtering by Australia’s Commonwealth government.

    That government has shown itself to be incompetent in simpler matters, eg, supporting the installation of “pink bat” insulation into Australian house roofs… how can such a gov’t be trusted with decisions as to what I or other Australians should be permitter to access on the Internet?!?

    They’ve picked the wrong right, again, in even pushing their “filtering” barrow this far…

    There are other, more important problems that need addressing in Australia, eg:

    - reducing our expenditures on defense (get our people & war machines back on AU soil),

    - addressing issues of child protection & (for all kids) educational opportunities

    - reducing our use of resources & energy (get us Off COAL, & onto renewable energies)

    - get us driving electric cars (eg, like Better Place’s)

    - solving poverty & closing the aboriginal health gap

    - save money by dumping obsolete monarchy-based symbols (governors’ mansions, etc.)

    - developing non-racist population policy (cut “baby bonus” & get quality not quantity)

    How soon we forget…

21. Renai LeMay
    Posted 23/02/2010 at 2:30 pm | Permalink | Reply

    Hi there,

    I find this comment quite harsh given that Whirlpool owner Simon Wright has contributed a vast amount to the Australian technology community over the years by running his site.

    Whirlpool has contributed in a massive way to keeping the bastards honest and providing a forum where information can freely flow between those who have it, those who want it, and those who simply want to discuss it.

    Simon has his quirks, as we all do. But I’d stand by him 100% because I know what he’s gone through over the years (from a legal perspective, for example), to keep the site independent.

    I don’t think you can seriously argue that Whirlpool isn’t well moderated. What moderation is there seems to me to be necessary to keep the forum on track and not getting too far off-topic.

    I find these kind of comments about Simon quite petty and irrelevant.

    Cheers,

    Renai LeMay
    Benevolent Dictator
    Delimiter