The Australian government has introduced proposed legislative changes to its controversial Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation Bill 2023 after it was shelved last year in the face of strong criticism.
Click icon for previous coverage
The unveiling of this revised legislation has inflamed the contentious debate over free speech, regulation and the digital information landscape.
In a statement this week, communications Minister Michelle Rowland said that misinformation poses “a serious threat to the safety and wellbeing of Australians, as well as to our democracy, society and economy… Doing nothing and allowing this problem to fester is not an option.”
Critics have hit back at the notion that free speech is a threat to Australia’s democracy. They say the government is essentially trying to convince its citizens that the only way they will be safe, is to permit the control of information online.
Last year, concerns were raised about the bill’s ‘vague’ definitions of misinformation, disinformation, and what would constitute serious harm. This year, lawmakers have tried to provide clearer definitions of those terms.
Misinformation is online content that is false, misleading or deceptive, that is shared or created without an intent to deceive but can cause and contribute to serious harm.
Disinformation is misinformation that is intentionally disseminated with the intent to deceive or cause serious harm.
Serious harm is harm that affects a significant portion of the Australian population, economy or environment, or undermines the integrity of an Australian democratic process.
However, concerns remain over who should be allowed to become the arbiter of ‘truth.’
The bill will give sweeping powers to the communications watchdog, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) to demand that social platforms (like Meta and X) keep their records and hand them over.
The effort to curb misinformation is likely to sweep up masses of legitimate speech too, just like it did when the government intervened over 4000 times to restrict or censor posts about the covid-19 pandemic, much of which turned out to be true.
The palpable irony is that during the pandemic, it was the government who became the biggest disseminator of misinformation, and that led to significant societal harms.
CEO of X, Elon Musk called the Australian government “fascists” over its proposed new law that could see social media companies fined up to 5 percent of their annual turnover for non-compliance.
Musk's comment drew ridicule from some Australian politicians.
Government Services Minister Bill Shorten said, “Elon Musk's had more positions on free speech than the Kama Sutra. When it's in its commercial interests, he is the champion of free speech and when he doesn't like it ... he's going to shut it all down.”
However, I say that’s the pot calling the kettle black!
The last time Musk tussled with Australian officials was in April, when the eSafety Commissioner issued an edict to X to remove graphic content of Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel being stabbed while delivering a sermon to worshipers at a Sydney church.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese called Musk an “arrogant billionaire" for resisting demands. Ultimately, Musk won the battle after the eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant discontinued the Federal Court proceedings in June this year.
In parliament yesterday, Federal Member for Monash, Russell Broadbent said, “These are truly unprecedented times. In my 25 years in the parliament, I've never seen legislation like it.”
Broadbent was particularly scathing of Section 14 of the bill, which aims to target content that may cause serious harm to “public health in Australia,” including the “efficacy of preventative health measures.”
“Where have I heard those words before?” remarked Broadbent, hinting at the government’s gross mishandling of preventative health measures during the pandemic.
“Why don't they just say misinformation is whatever discussion or debate goes against the narrative of the government of the day?”
Hear, hear!
The 5-minute speech is available below:
Russell went to a school whose motto is "Dare to be wise".
How refreshing to hear a politician with obvious integrity and authenticity.
The empty chamber in which he delivered his speech suggests that those without his ethical standards chose to leave and not be pricked by their remaining sense of conscience.
Is this going to be the new world order? We’re not just reading 1984, we’re now living it!!