LAST CHANCE: What you can do to stop the misinformation bill
Last week, the Australian Government’s controversial misinformation bill was passed in the House of Representatives with the support of Labor and the Teals (with the exception of Teal Allegra Spender. The Greens did not participate in the vote).
Next, the bill will be voted on in the Senate, where it stands a chance of being blocked if the Greens and/or the crossbench vote against it.
As readers of DDU know, I’ve published extensively on how impractical this legislation is, and how it is likely to cause more harm than that which it seeks to prevent.
Just this week, some further problems have come to light in testimony and submissions to the Senate’s inquiry into the bill.
There was constitutional law expert Professor Anne Twomey lifting the lid on the fact-checking con. As an expert frequently called upon for fact-checks, Twomey said that in her experience, fact-checkers are often “young kids out of university” who “misunderstand the experts” and “often get it wrong.”
“They're taking on this really important role of making a decision that will lead Meta or Google or whatever to make decisions about what is true and what is false, when the fact-checker themselves hasn't properly understood what the experts have said,” Twomey told the inquiry.
Another revelation is that the legislation will definitely apply to opinions. Per the explanatory memorandum accompanying the bill, “information” that could be censored as misinformation “is intended to include opinions, claims, commentary and invective.”
And
has written on Substack that the new legislation will regulate content globally, not just within Australia (eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant is no doubt angling for such an amendment to the Online Safety Act as well).As stated in the explanatory memorandum, “Clause 3 [of the misinformation bill] extends the operation of Schedule 9 of the Broadcasting Services Act to acts, omissions, matters, and things outside Australia.”
This poses a threat to constitutionally protected expression in other countries, writes Christensen. “It doesn’t matter if the content in question is shared by an American citizen exercising their constitutionally enshrined First Amendment rights; it can be flagged, censored, or removed simply because Australian bureaucrats deem it to be ‘misinformation.’”
Final chance to stop the bill
It is uncertain which day the misinformation bill will go to a vote in the Senate - it could be any day from Monday 18 November, or they may wait for the inquiry report to be handed down first, by Monday 25 November at the latest. Labor will vote for it. The Coalition will vote against, as they did in the Lower House.
BREAKING UPDATE 6pm Friday 15 November 2024
Crossbench Senators Tammy Tyrrell, David Pocock, Jacqui Lambie and Fatima Payman have all declared their intention to vote AGAINST the bill.
This is enough to block the bill!
Senator Lidia Thorpe has not yet stated her position, and Senator David Van has said he will vote FOR the bill.
But there’s still time for people to change their minds, so keep the pressure on. Email the senators who have come out against the bill to thank them, and email the ones who are undecided or for the bill to ask them to vote against it.
David Pocock [email protected]
David Van [email protected]
Fatima Payman [email protected]
Jacqui Lambie [email protected]
Lidia Thorpe [email protected]
Tammy Tyrrell [email protected]
Substacker
has compiled a list of senators by state, with contact details. Or, search for your postcode to find your senators on the Australian Parliament website. You can also contact senators outside of your jurisdiction.You can also sign a petition against the bill and find resources like templates for letter-writing, sign-making and social media tiles via the Aligned Council of Australia website.
Bonne chance!
To support my work, share, subscribe, and/or make a one-off contribution to my Kofi account. Thanks!
Apart from my submission (which is unlikely to be read) I've written to three independent senators (2 in Vic, 1 in WA) - probably should do more - but in my view this MAD Bill is only a cover for something far worse, from a structural viewpoint, given the Liberals, who are currently objecting could repeal the MAD Bill when returned to power.
I'm far more worried about the "Social Media Ban for the Under 16s". Both the ALP and LP are supporting it, so, it's going to be sent straight through, if there isn't a massive public outcry. They've been waiting until the Digital ID goes live on 1 December, and we know from senate estimates that they intend to have everyone facially scanned or digitally ID'd to go onto social media. I'm not even going to subject to the Misinformation Bill if I can't get on because I reject Digital ID.
People protesting the Digital ID (me) are going to be demonised for 'not doing their bit to protect the kids', and I suspect the Albanese and Dutton's concern for the Under 16s is going to last about the same length of time as that between Locking Down to Save Granny and The Vaccine Rollout that Killed Granny.
Digital ID allows for discriminations of all kinds.
Alexandra Marshall has done an excellent piece to camera on both the MAD bill and Under 16s. She realised that the lawmakers (typically over 30) are completely lacking in school age social media experience. They have no idea of the experience they're regulating. But the argument about whether a ban is good/bad for the U16s is peripheral & distraction to the big picture Digital ID intent. https://x.com/ellymelly/status/1856654087934410833
Sorry to take it off topic.
PS. Some other points made by Alexandra...
Who harmed business? Social Media or govt lockdowns?
Who destroyed faith in institutions? SM or health bureaucrats?
Who created & silenced vax victims? SM or govt?
Who assaulted citizens in street? SM or police?
Who severely harmed the health & wellbing of children? SM or govt?
The same could apply on "misinformation". Who's going to be supplying most of it? Social media or government?
Senators told 👍✅