Home | Today's Headlines | Contact | New Sites | Job Centre | Investment Centre

Reader Comments on Aardvark Daily 18 February 2002

Note: the comments below are the unabridged submissions of readers and do
not necessarily reflect the opinions of the publisher.


From: James
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Judge looks at porn site

Three points:

1. Porn is running at only number 12 in the rankings of internet bandwidth
by subject. Number 1 is music. I don't think the journalists / editors in
question would have been interested if the judge had been caught listening
to music, unless it was illegal of course.

2. I wonder what the newspaper's opinion would be if the judge had been
caught doing some work, looking at legal papers / case histories /
research on the internet from home. Perhaps we the public would have to
pay him some extra money.

3. There is public interest when a judge demonstrates he/she is out of
touch with the public. Now we have a newspaper trying to find out if
there's public interest in the opposite. That's fair enough I suppose.

Aardvark Responds
In 1999, "sex" was the #1 search term (reference).  According to
this site, "sex" fell to number two position during 2000.

This story claims that sex is now ranked 12th but also makes
it clear that "sex sites might not get a lot of press, and no
longer draw in the most users, but they certainly maintain high
audience numbers."

However, in a seemingly current report, the Internet survey
company Websense quotes a source as claiming that "The No. 1
search term used at search engine sites is the word sex".

From: MrPinga
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: wasting tax payers money

One has to wonder which is more wasteful...

looking at some nudie pictures on a work internet


spending weeks paying some consultants bucketloads of cash
(by the hour i would bet) to say "yeah... looking at nudie
pictures using your work internet connection is bad
mmmkay?, dont do it again mmmkay?" and then typing that up
into a 400page report.

And what about 'questionable' and (usually)
unsolicated 'joke' emails that get sent around? I'm sure
that many of those in the public sector are on the
receiving end of the numerous attachments that fly around
every day... perhaps the government should investigate that
too... why not... its not like the auckland hospitals need
$72 million or anything...

From: Paul Stevens
For : The Editor (for publication)
Subj: Sensible summary

What a pleasure it was to read your oh so sensible summary
of this "net scandal" that has been spalshed over the
mainstream media.  The points that you raised were spot on,
and I personally believe that it is a great shame that such a
(relatively) small number of people will read your sensible
commentary on this issue.

You REALLY do have your head screwed on and it is quite
simply a farce that we are virtually force fed this sort of
nonsense that has appeared in the errant, mainstream media.

Hit Reload For Latest Comments

Now Have Your Say

Home | Today's Headlines | Contact | New Sites | Job Centre | Investment Centre