1. Professor Charles Crothers New Zealand Internet Rights Survey

2. Methodology In order to ascertain the extent to which people in New Zealand support various internet rights an on-line survey was commissioned. Only those aspects of potential internet rights which seemed readily understandable by the general public. While the sample was constrained not just to internet users - presumably few non-internet users will have developed enough knowledge/experience of the internet to formulate views about internet rights – but to those who are on an internet panel. This later was a pragmatic consideration and the extent to which the views 755 People 20-64 years of age on a Buzz panel were asked their views in April 2013. Those covered were similar in characteristics to the overall NZ population. The respondents are particularly skewed towards those of higher education qualifications and there is a moderate over-representation of respondents from major cities and a corresponding under-representation of those from rural areas. The average length of time spent on the survey was 8 minutes. It was considered that obtaining the views of under 20 year olds was too difficult given their poor response- availability and that people 65 and over might have insufficient experience with the internet to be able to provide knowledgeable answers.

3. Conceptual framework Key (potential) internet rights were: Access to the internet Abilities to use the internet Rights to express opinions Rights not to be subject to unfortunate things happening to people on-line. Rights to free access to information (not covered).

4. Socio-demographic characteristics included Age-group, gender, settlement size and education and extent of weekly internet usage. It was found that while age and gender had shaped differences the other Quotas were set in relation to age- group and gender.

5. Hierarchy of Rights General statement re Rights - 89% agreeing. Extension of rights to the internet context – 73%. Support for a right of access to the internet – 59%.

6. How support Access & For Whom Through a government subsidy of Internet equipment and connection costs – 41% Through free access at libraries -94%. Supporting internet access of the elderly (64%), People in low income households (61%) and especially people in rural areas (69%). About a quarter came up with other groups: especially disabled, elderly, youth A solid minority (about a sixth of respondents) who reject any attempt to operationalise such a right (denying that there should be such a right and suggesting that – just as ones phone or other access – you are required to pay for it. Right to access include some training so that people can use the Internet effectively -55%).

7. Freedom of Expression Should not be curbed for any reason -33%; People should not be allowed to defame other people on the Internet, even if this means their right to freedom of expression is curbed -68.2% On balance people’s right to privacy on the Internet is more important than other people’s right to freedom of expression - 64.5% A third didn’t answer this write-in question re circumstances justifying curbing. The nearly two-thirds answering mentioned bullying, breach of privacy etc.

8. Complaints Authority There should be a which can order changes e.g. content removed if there is a considerable breach of someone’s privacy -86%. Half thought best type of Complaints authority would be a government agency, whereas a third supported an industry agency.

9. Summary Views on Access are not same as views on Freedoms Types of view re Access: - internet-deniers (often quite angry about it) who see the internet as nothing more than an extension of their phone and to be paid for in full and - internet acceptors who see the internet as giving access to a (partial) new world and where everyone (or many) needs to be lifted over any thresholds to take full advantage of this. - and of course intermediate groupings

10. Summary contd. Views on ‘Freedom’ are less polarised but also some: -Who see no need for any controls at all -Who see existing protections adequately cover internet situations -Who see extra difficulties arising with internet