ACMA to introduce legislation fining social media platforms millions of dollars for spreading what ACMA calls mis and dis-information-what I call inconvenient truths.
"Misinformation is “false information that is spread, regardless of intent to mislead.”
Disinformation means “false information, as about a country’s military strength or plans, disseminated by a government or intelligence agency in a hostile act of tactical political subversion.” It is also used more generally to mean “deliberately misleading or biased information; manipulated narrative or facts; propaganda.”
So, disinformation is misinformation that is knowingly (intentionally) spread"
I just copied and pasted this for information to readers.
Now tell me who is playing God to decide what is misinformation and disinformation?
He wrote the famous novel 1984 in which a totalitarian government determines what ‘facts’ are allowed to be believed via its Ministry of Truth.
Bizarrely, last Sunday was the day the Australian Government announced it would be setting up its own ‘Ministry of Truth’.
That’s right! On George Orwell’s birthday, Australia’s Albanese Labor Government declared it would trample over freedom of speech by giving a government agency new powers to combat what it deems as ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ online.
The question is who gets to determine what is misinformation or disinformation and what is the truth?
The past few years have shown us that many things declared as ‘fake news’ one day end up being proven truthful several months down the track.
The Albanese Labor Government haven’t said how they will determine what they believe to be false or not, but they have said that they will target anything that they think is:
• hateful against the LGBTIQ community;
• disruptive to society;
• harmful to democracy;
• harmful to the environment; or
• harmful to the economy.
All of this is extremely subjective and open to someone’s interpretation.
The proposed law will cover social media platforms, search engines, news aggregators, web forums, video platforms like YouTube and podcasting platforms.
Just about everything on the internet is in the firing line of this new Australian ‘Ministry of Truth’!
Currently the proposed law and powers are in the draft stage and the Australian Government is seeking feedback on them.
Australians must grab this opportunity to defend free speech and tell the government they don’t want them regulating what can and can’t be said online.
If the people remain silent now then, in the not-too-distant future, silence is all that might be left for those who uphold the values of faith, freedom and family in Australia.
Goodness me what alot of confusion God is not the Author of Confusion surley we need to hear the plain truth in all of this so called voice father bring it forth
Not only do they want lack of balance on the Voice referendum on social media but they so glaringly have it on the ABC. Last night's Australian Story featured Megan Davis. When will they have Jacinta Price or Warren Mundine on this program? I am guessing never.
You are so right. And considering the ABC's charter demands they show balance in all reporting, they are apparently in breach on so many issues - the voice, vaccination, medical treatment, politics...the list goes on and on. It's no longer OUR ABC.
In light of the fact since lockdowns and vaccine mandates the ALP has proven they don't support democratic freedoms and this latest attack on free speech on social media reinforces that because of this they should be banned as a political party and shut down altogether.
Actually, both parties and the Greens and Nationals have supported the most tyrannical and undemocratic restrictions over the last 3 1/2 years. If only Australians would stop voting with their eyes closed and instead, choose only those parties and politicians who support them, we would be living in a much better, safer and fairer Australia!
More than 20 years ago when the AVN was actively involved in trying to introduce a Bill of Rights in Australia, so many of those we thought would have seen the need instead warned that by enshrining rights into a document, anything that wasn't stated would be considered to not be a right. We can see now that had we only been able to get that through back then, we might not be where we are today. Though that said, in the US where there IS an excellent constitution and bill of rights, the government has simply acted like neither one of those documents exist. It still would be good to legislate for our rights here in Oz since the government will do whatever they can to repress us.
This is disgraceful. We've been censored right through Covid, and the truth held to ridicule as misinformation. Now they're threatening the Social Media Companies with huge fines. I'd like to know who are the fact checkers they'll be using to tell if posts are fact or fiction? Facebook have already admitted in court that their fact checkers just use their own opinion, so what will happen now? the Government will hire people, all on the same page with the narrative of the WHO, UN and WEF and anything that doesn't suit these organizations will be deemed untrue/misinformation or hate speech. As a result, we'll be further gagged, and freedom of thinking and speech will go out the window. I fear for our country, as it looks as though we're going to become a puppet of the elites in Europe/America, and Australia will no longer be a sovereign nation. (If indeed it still is), which I doubt.
The ACMA's document "Misinformation and news quality on digital platforms in Australia" is 1.1MB and 49 pages big, so I have not yet read it all.
But right from the starting pages it appears to be written on the assumption that the Australian population is incompetent at assessing things they hear or read, and thus that "we dumb citizens" need to be protected from hearing or reading anything that is incorrect.
provides advice for citizens about assessing what they read on the Internet. It is good advice, and if we all took notice of it, we would not be misled by so-called misinformation or disinformation.
It is unacceptable to penalise Internet service providers for the incompetence of some citizens who fail to follow such advice. None of us is responsible for the incompetence or stupidity of others - we are responsible for our own incompetence or stupidity.
Any attempt to penalise Internet service providers for the incompetence or stupidity of some citizens implies that the Internet service providers must check whether information posted by others is correct or incorrect, but the subject matter is often far removed from the core competencies of people who set up Internet services, and so Internet service providers need to employ fact checkers.
During the last few years we have seen so many examples of so-called "fact checkers" being incorrect themselves, that "fact checkers" are now down at the bottom of my list of people whom I trust (way, way below door-to-door salesmen and politicians).
We have also seen examples of so-called "fact checkers" following their own notions (or the current government's notions!) regarding any information that they happen to wish were not true.
Therefor I am very strongly against the idea of giving the ACMA any additional powers related to mis- or dis-information.
A far more beneficial approach would be additional effort to educate citizens, from early school years onwards, in the wise advice on the ACMA's website mentioned above.
Each individual is responsible for assessing what he/she believes, or does not believe -- it is NOT the responsibility of Internet service providers.
Correction. The first three items in ACMA's guidance are good, but their list of fact checking references gives me the heebie jeebies. For example, the first item on AAP's fact checking website deals with the rumour that Covid vaccines cause infertility and the video "refuting" that is at a pathetically shallow depth of enquiry.
Although it is correct that Covid vaccines do not automatically cause infertility in every woman who gets them, the medical specialists whose writings on this topic I have read state that Pfizer did not allow women of child bearing age to be included in trials of the vaccines because they knew enough about how mRNA vaccines operate to raise questions about fertility; and some gynaecology specialists have reported some ill-effects of the mRNA "vaccines" regarding fertility.
The thing that really bugs me about the explanatory video on the AAP website is that it presents the situation as though "all is known" and there is "zero problem" -- but reality is not as simple as that. I do not like videos that want me to accept a "dumbed down" explanation!
You make some excellent points. The only thing I believe though is that the government doesn't really want to impose these fines to harm the social media companies. This is their use of the big stick so that these companies will do their dirty work for them in censoring and preventing the sharing of valid information. And even if the information were completely invalid, as you said, they need to trust us enough to work that out for ourselves. The government isn't our daddy! and to be honest, most of those in bureaucracy are so stupid, they wouldn't possibly be capable of telling right from wrong anyway :-)
Spot on, Meryl. There is lots of evidence that the USA's government has exercised censorship and avoided falling foul of their constitutional obligations to not exercise censorship, by going behind the scenes and advising media companies about what the media companies should censor. What a deceitful scam! I suspect that the Aussie government has done just like that!
SO we can only share information if it agrees with what the government espouses. Am I still living in Australia? I'm so sick of their lies, lies and more lies.
All submissions should have one word in them in as large a font as possible "NAZI'S", they dislike Nazi's, according to them it is NAZI hate speech we are responsible for. Who did propaganda better than anyone back in the day. The NAZI's, everything they do at present is mirrored from the same playbook. Not very professional and the like, but, its the truth.
"Misinformation is “false information that is spread, regardless of intent to mislead.”
Disinformation means “false information, as about a country’s military strength or plans, disseminated by a government or intelligence agency in a hostile act of tactical political subversion.” It is also used more generally to mean “deliberately misleading or biased information; manipulated narrative or facts; propaganda.”
So, disinformation is misinformation that is knowingly (intentionally) spread"
I just copied and pasted this for information to readers.
Now tell me who is playing God to decide what is misinformation and disinformation?
Make an easy submission to the Department with this petition: https://citizengo.org/en-au/rf/211329-hands-online-free-speech
George Orwell would have turned 120 last Sunday.
He wrote the famous novel 1984 in which a totalitarian government determines what ‘facts’ are allowed to be believed via its Ministry of Truth.
Bizarrely, last Sunday was the day the Australian Government announced it would be setting up its own ‘Ministry of Truth’.
That’s right! On George Orwell’s birthday, Australia’s Albanese Labor Government declared it would trample over freedom of speech by giving a government agency new powers to combat what it deems as ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ online.
Stop Labor’s anti-free speech laws! Sign the petition today: https://citizengo.org/en-au/rf/211329-hands-online-free-speech
The question is who gets to determine what is misinformation or disinformation and what is the truth?
The past few years have shown us that many things declared as ‘fake news’ one day end up being proven truthful several months down the track.
The Albanese Labor Government haven’t said how they will determine what they believe to be false or not, but they have said that they will target anything that they think is:
• hateful against the LGBTIQ community;
• disruptive to society;
• harmful to democracy;
• harmful to the environment; or
• harmful to the economy.
All of this is extremely subjective and open to someone’s interpretation.
The proposed law will cover social media platforms, search engines, news aggregators, web forums, video platforms like YouTube and podcasting platforms.
Just about everything on the internet is in the firing line of this new Australian ‘Ministry of Truth’!
Fight this attack on free speech by signing the petition: https://citizengo.org/en-au/rf/211329-hands-online-free-speech
Currently the proposed law and powers are in the draft stage and the Australian Government is seeking feedback on them.
Australians must grab this opportunity to defend free speech and tell the government they don’t want them regulating what can and can’t be said online.
If the people remain silent now then, in the not-too-distant future, silence is all that might be left for those who uphold the values of faith, freedom and family in Australia.
Tell the government to get its hands off our right to free speech today! Sign the petition: https://citizengo.org/en-au/rf/211329-hands-online-free-speech
Goodness me what alot of confusion God is not the Author of Confusion surley we need to hear the plain truth in all of this so called voice father bring it forth
Not only do they want lack of balance on the Voice referendum on social media but they so glaringly have it on the ABC. Last night's Australian Story featured Megan Davis. When will they have Jacinta Price or Warren Mundine on this program? I am guessing never.
You are so right. And considering the ABC's charter demands they show balance in all reporting, they are apparently in breach on so many issues - the voice, vaccination, medical treatment, politics...the list goes on and on. It's no longer OUR ABC.
In light of the fact since lockdowns and vaccine mandates the ALP has proven they don't support democratic freedoms and this latest attack on free speech on social media reinforces that because of this they should be banned as a political party and shut down altogether.
Actually, both parties and the Greens and Nationals have supported the most tyrannical and undemocratic restrictions over the last 3 1/2 years. If only Australians would stop voting with their eyes closed and instead, choose only those parties and politicians who support them, we would be living in a much better, safer and fairer Australia!
We desperately need to have our inalienable rights - including speech - enshrined in a US-style Constitution.
More than 20 years ago when the AVN was actively involved in trying to introduce a Bill of Rights in Australia, so many of those we thought would have seen the need instead warned that by enshrining rights into a document, anything that wasn't stated would be considered to not be a right. We can see now that had we only been able to get that through back then, we might not be where we are today. Though that said, in the US where there IS an excellent constitution and bill of rights, the government has simply acted like neither one of those documents exist. It still would be good to legislate for our rights here in Oz since the government will do whatever they can to repress us.
How the Jesuits have controlled the destiny of the USA
https://themillenniumreport.com/2016/06/how-the-jesuits-have-controlled-the-destiny-of-the-usa/
The Australian Government will be your single source of truth. Where have we heard that before?
Our buddy, Jacinda. Bless her cotton socks. Albo has taken a page out of her WEF-written book, hasn't he?
This is disgraceful. We've been censored right through Covid, and the truth held to ridicule as misinformation. Now they're threatening the Social Media Companies with huge fines. I'd like to know who are the fact checkers they'll be using to tell if posts are fact or fiction? Facebook have already admitted in court that their fact checkers just use their own opinion, so what will happen now? the Government will hire people, all on the same page with the narrative of the WHO, UN and WEF and anything that doesn't suit these organizations will be deemed untrue/misinformation or hate speech. As a result, we'll be further gagged, and freedom of thinking and speech will go out the window. I fear for our country, as it looks as though we're going to become a puppet of the elites in Europe/America, and Australia will no longer be a sovereign nation. (If indeed it still is), which I doubt.
The entire world is at risk right now. The only countries that potentially aren't are the few the WEF hasn't managed to infiltrate.
Here is the site to leave a comment I believe. https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/have-your-say/new-acma-powers-combat-misinformation-and-disinformation
The ACMA's document "Misinformation and news quality on digital platforms in Australia" is 1.1MB and 49 pages big, so I have not yet read it all.
But right from the starting pages it appears to be written on the assumption that the Australian population is incompetent at assessing things they hear or read, and thus that "we dumb citizens" need to be protected from hearing or reading anything that is incorrect.
The ACMA's web page
https://www.acma.gov.au/online-misinformation?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
provides advice for citizens about assessing what they read on the Internet. It is good advice, and if we all took notice of it, we would not be misled by so-called misinformation or disinformation.
It is unacceptable to penalise Internet service providers for the incompetence of some citizens who fail to follow such advice. None of us is responsible for the incompetence or stupidity of others - we are responsible for our own incompetence or stupidity.
Any attempt to penalise Internet service providers for the incompetence or stupidity of some citizens implies that the Internet service providers must check whether information posted by others is correct or incorrect, but the subject matter is often far removed from the core competencies of people who set up Internet services, and so Internet service providers need to employ fact checkers.
During the last few years we have seen so many examples of so-called "fact checkers" being incorrect themselves, that "fact checkers" are now down at the bottom of my list of people whom I trust (way, way below door-to-door salesmen and politicians).
We have also seen examples of so-called "fact checkers" following their own notions (or the current government's notions!) regarding any information that they happen to wish were not true.
Therefor I am very strongly against the idea of giving the ACMA any additional powers related to mis- or dis-information.
A far more beneficial approach would be additional effort to educate citizens, from early school years onwards, in the wise advice on the ACMA's website mentioned above.
Each individual is responsible for assessing what he/she believes, or does not believe -- it is NOT the responsibility of Internet service providers.
Correction. The first three items in ACMA's guidance are good, but their list of fact checking references gives me the heebie jeebies. For example, the first item on AAP's fact checking website deals with the rumour that Covid vaccines cause infertility and the video "refuting" that is at a pathetically shallow depth of enquiry.
Although it is correct that Covid vaccines do not automatically cause infertility in every woman who gets them, the medical specialists whose writings on this topic I have read state that Pfizer did not allow women of child bearing age to be included in trials of the vaccines because they knew enough about how mRNA vaccines operate to raise questions about fertility; and some gynaecology specialists have reported some ill-effects of the mRNA "vaccines" regarding fertility.
The thing that really bugs me about the explanatory video on the AAP website is that it presents the situation as though "all is known" and there is "zero problem" -- but reality is not as simple as that. I do not like videos that want me to accept a "dumbed down" explanation!
You make some excellent points. The only thing I believe though is that the government doesn't really want to impose these fines to harm the social media companies. This is their use of the big stick so that these companies will do their dirty work for them in censoring and preventing the sharing of valid information. And even if the information were completely invalid, as you said, they need to trust us enough to work that out for ourselves. The government isn't our daddy! and to be honest, most of those in bureaucracy are so stupid, they wouldn't possibly be capable of telling right from wrong anyway :-)
Spot on, Meryl. There is lots of evidence that the USA's government has exercised censorship and avoided falling foul of their constitutional obligations to not exercise censorship, by going behind the scenes and advising media companies about what the media companies should censor. What a deceitful scam! I suspect that the Aussie government has done just like that!
SO we can only share information if it agrees with what the government espouses. Am I still living in Australia? I'm so sick of their lies, lies and more lies.
That's about it. Rotten mongrels, aren't they?
All submissions should have one word in them in as large a font as possible "NAZI'S", they dislike Nazi's, according to them it is NAZI hate speech we are responsible for. Who did propaganda better than anyone back in the day. The NAZI's, everything they do at present is mirrored from the same playbook. Not very professional and the like, but, its the truth.
I like it, to be honest. And I'm not a snowflake who will faint at the sound of that word. If the shoe fits...
Mis/disinformation is anything these morons don't like.
A short and to the point submission is a small ask in this situation, so that myst be step 1 !
Thank you!
Be careful what you wish for Australia!!
The Devil you know than the one you DON'T!!