From an ex-pat Aussie point of view this is the most obviously disingenuous campaign I've ever seen.

Damn right GetUp are statist. They actively campaigned to get Kevin Rudd elected and demonised the previous Coalition (Tory - sort of) Govt as the party of internet censorship (much like the demonising of the Bush Administration. sidebar: At what point does the cognitive dissonance kick in. When every Radio Station, TV channel, newspaper and blog carries your message exactly HOW was dissent crushed?).
Now that their chosen Kevin is Prime Minister, HE'S the internet censorship demon.
GetUp only have themselves to blame and I'm also pretty sure they'd support internet censorship if there was something they didn't like. They are, as you point out, happy to consider state coercion as long as it's popular and/or "progressive". Where will they stand if the concept of internet censorship becomes a "progressive" cause? Right where they stand now; on the side of state coercion, interference and being a large contributor to the establishment of the "Nanny State."

Where will they stand if the concept of internet censorship becomes a "progressive" cause?

Which it will, of course. Silence the fascists! Think of the kiddies! Zero tolerance for climate change deniers!

Quite so - a progressive internet censorship Bill is going through the United States Congress right now (using the excuse of the young girl who committed suicide after a fictional boy, really the mother of another girl, broke up with her on line).

The Bill would make a criminal offence (punishable by fines and prison) hostile speech that was transmitted electronically (this would cover modern television and radio as well as the internet of course) - hostile aggressive speech meaning speech that was intended to upset the person it was about.

For example the things that Bill O' Reilly, Neil Cavuto and Glenn Beck say about Barney Frank and so on.

Sharing a cell with Neil Cavuto would be a difficult due to his medical problems and my lack of medical training.

My political opinions are closer to those of Glenn Beck than Bill O'Reilly - but I think prison would drive Glenn over the edge (and sharing a cell with a man who has been driven over the edge is not nice - I worked in the Prison Service of England and Wales for awhile).

So that leaves Bill - O.K. he is twice my size so he gets the top bunk.

"But Paul the First Amendment....."

No part of the Constitution of the United States is worth anything if the courts will not enforce it.

If anyone does not believe me ask the Chrysler and General Motors bond holders - after all their contracts were protected by the Constitution.

This is the ultimate "astroturf" group. Formed by menbers/hangers on of the green/left/lab parties here in Oz, and promoted relentlessly as a "non partisan progressive group".

Myhairy left nut, they are completely owned and maintained group affilliated with the Australian labor party. If they are opposing something you can be pretty sure its as a smokescreen for the government to "listen to community concerns" and do what they want (in this case dropping the rediculous censorship would be good).
However just realise if you sign on for one campain against internet censorship, you will be counted as being "strongly concerned about" every other issue they bang on about.