Essay by Eric Worrall
As Australia heads towards its next state and federal election cycle, the progressive Australian Federal Government is pushing ahead with laws that would silence media criticism of its key policy positions.
‘Assault on our freedoms’: Government’s revised online misinformation bill criticised as ‘chilling attack’ on free speech
Labor’s new online misinformation bill has been criticised as a “chilling attack” on free speech, with critics arguing the government’s definition of “serious harm” could capture “any difference of opinion”.
Patrick Hannaford Digital Reporter
4 min read
September 12, 2024 – 5:00PM…
Communications Minister Michelle Rowland introduced the bill into parliament on Thursday, saying misinformation and disinformation posed a “serious threat” to the “safety and wellbeing” of Australians as well as our “democracy, society and economy”.
The Albanese government was forced to scrap its earlier draft laws after they were widely condemned by everyone from media organisations and tech companies to civil liberties groups and even the Australian Human Rights Commission.
Minister Rowland said the government had listened to feedback and the new law had been amended to “carefully balance the public interest in combating seriously harmful misinformation and disinformation with the freedom of expression that is so fundamental to our democracy”.
But critics have lined up to slam the bill, with the Institute of Public Affairs describing the law as “the biggest attack on free speech in Australia’s peacetime history”.
“The misinformation laws introduced into federal parliament today are a chilling attack on the freedom of speech of all Australians. The new bill expands the scope of censorship provisions that were not included in the government’s flawed first draft,” said John Storey, Director of Law and Policy at the IPA.
…
The Institute of Public Affairs has the following opinion on the new law.
Amended misinformation law intensifies attack on free speech
Written by: John Storey
September 12, 2024“The anti-disinformation laws introduced into federal parliament today are a chilling attack on the freedom of speech of all Australians. The new bill expands the scope of censorship provisions that were not included in the government’s flawed first draft,” said John Storey, director of law and policy at the Institute of Public Affairs.
Modified The Communications Laws Amendment (Anti-Disinformation and Misinformation) Bill 2024 gives the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) sweeping powers to fine social media companies if they are found to be failing to adequately moderate ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’. The new bill has three fundamental flaws:
- A revised definition of ‘misinformation’ means content that ‘verifiable is false, misleading or deceptive’ would create legal authority for politically oriented fact checkers to determine what is true and false (Articles 13(1) and 13(2)).
- It creates a The administrative apparatus of the star council is not elected and is not accountable to the power to conduct investigations and hearings to ensure compliance with censorship guidelines that may target mainstream Australians (Appendix 2, Clause 2).
- A new definition of ‘serious harm’ is even broader than the first bill and is likely to capture any differences of opinion (Article 14).
“The government’s proposed ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ laws are the biggest attack on freedom of speech in Australia’s peacetime history and have no place in a liberal democracy like Australia,” Mr Storey said.
“Big tech companies will become the censorship and enforcement arm of the federal government to suppress debate and speech they disagree with.”
“Under these laws, even truth is not a defence. If a citizen disseminates information that is true, but ACMA or a fact-checker labels it as ‘misleading’ or ‘deceptive’ because it ‘lacks context’, then that information falls within the scope of these laws,” said Mr Storey.
The revised law fails to take into account the deep concerns of many mainstream Australians, who can now be targeted for prosecution by an unelected and unaccountable bureaucracy simply for voicing their sincere views online.
“The federal government has not listened to the free speech concerns raised by mainstream Australians. Instead, it is pandering to its political base by actually expanding ACMA’s censorship powers, such as sneaking in a change to the definition of ‘harm’ to include ‘defamation’,” Mr Storey said.
Previous research by the Institute of Public Affairs found that fact-checking organisations were systematically biased and targeted the ‘No’ campaign in the Voice to Parliament referendum. That research found
- So-called ‘fact checkers’ published 187 fact-checking articles related to Voice – 170 of these reviews, or 91%, targeted complaints made by supporters of the No.
- Almost every example supporting the No case is judged to be false. 99% of the complaints assessed in support of the No case were considered ‘false’, while only 59% of the few complaints assessed in support of the Yes case were considered ‘false’.
To download previous IPA research click here
The IPA article (above) argues that both individuals and organizations can be targeted.
The following presentation from the Australian Academy of Technology and Engineering (ATSE) and the Australian Academy of Science (AAS) states that Climate skepticism is the target of new misinformation laws. If the law is passed, according to the submission, Australia’s top scientific bodies will use the new law to silence anyone who publicly disagrees with their alarmist stance on climate change and the Great Barrier Reef. They even included a reference to President Trump (top 4).
I’m not sure what Anthony would do with a subpoena from the Australian government to stop publishing climate “misinformation” and provide full contact details of all authors, but I suspect it would make an interesting article on WUWT.
Our Favorite Reef Rebel Peter Ridd has started producing a series of videos on Australia’s woke science organisations and other interesting topics, well worth watching, in my opinion demonstrating why Australia’s science institutions are not qualified to be guardians of scientific truth. One of Peter’s videos alerted me to the above extreme submission.
Elon Musk, who has been heavily criticized for Stand up to the Australian Government and winThere is only one word to describe the latest move to clamp down on free speech.
As WUWT has pointed out before, what is happening in Australia is part of a larger picture. Around the world, radical left politicians appear to be working in unison to silence opposition to their policies.
In South America and Europe, freedoms are being eroded by increasingly punitive laws aimed at silencing critics of leftist policies.
Musk’s X banned in Brazil after misinformation controversy
Will Elon Musk really get arrested and X be canceled?
The United States is not immune to radical efforts around the world by governments to impose censorship on “disinformation.”
The United States has strong protections against the Federal Government coercing public speech, but that hasn’t stopped the European Union from allegedly using indirect coercion to censor people in the United States — possibly at the behest of the Biden Administration.
In at least one case, the Federal Government has been accused of acting directly to censor Americans—in my opinion, a blatant violation of the First Amendment.
Zuckerberg says White House pressured Facebook to ‘censor’ some COVID-19 content during pandemic
Politics August 27, 2024 11:26 AM EDT
WASHINGTON (AP) — Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said senior Biden administration officials pressured Facebook to “censor” some COVID-19 content during the pandemic and vowed that the social media giant would push back if faced with such requests again.
CLOCK: Meta’s Nick Clegg on the challenges of AI content and misinformation
In a letter to Rep. Jim Jordan, the Republican chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Zuckerberg alleged that officials, including those from the White House, had “repeatedly pressured” Facebook over several months to remove “certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire.”
…
The United States Constitution is an inspiration to the world, an effort by some very intelligent people to try to protect the freedoms they paid for with their blood for future generations. Yet your Federal Government has been accused of blatantly violating the First Amendment. None of the politicians or employees accused of these acts have faced any serious legal consequences for their actions. Those responsible for these alleged constitutional violations have so far gotten away with it.
Unless you elect politicians who support and defend the laws and constitution of the United States, what is happening in Australia today could easily happen to the United States.regardless of the protections enshrined in the United States Constitution. Unless wrongdoers face real legal consequences for violating the Constitution, constitutional violators will feel safe to continue violating the Constitution whenever it is convenient. The Constitution is a document – it needs the support of politicians, lawyers, the judiciary, and those who believe in and work to uphold the protections in the United States Constitution to make it work.
Related
