The majority of the pieces included are from the print media (newspaper and journal articles); others are taken from government reports and publications. One piece was taken from the Electronic Frontiers Australia web site, but I would have liked to see something illustrating the new forms of communication available on the Net — an edited exchange from a mailing list or newsgroup, perhaps.
Though naturally I think the censors get too much space, all kinds of positions are represented. On the one side, Robert Manne supports the ban on Irving, Margot Prior argues for stronger controls on television violence, Young Media Australia explains how to complain about programs you don't like, and the Office of Film and Literature Classification guidelines for film and computer game classification are given in full. On the other side, David Irving gets to speak for himself, David Marr opposes a separate classification system for videos, Terry Lane and David Flint argue against the reopening of the Theophanous case in which the High Court found an implied right to political free speech, Les Carlyon mocks film censorship, and an assortment of people speak out against Internet censorship.
For a publication clearly meant to spark debate, however, Censorship is a little staid in its choice of material. There are no explicit calls from ultra-conservatives for banning things indiscriminately (though the recommendations of the Senate Select Committee on Community Standards on violence in the media come close) and no arguments from civil libertarians opposing censorship entirely. But Censorship is a useful collection which I would recommend to schools, or indeed to anyone seeking a general feel for the public debate over censorship in Australia.