I was feeling happier, right up until I read about the Corporate Government getting a free run for disinformation on vaccines.... But wait.... AGAIN the wording is really bad... "harm [..] to the efficacy of preventative health measures" ... You can't harm EFFICACY with words - public health measures either have efficacy or they don't. Who is writing this stuff??
As Bret Weinstein noted accurately, 'there is no way to control bad information without controlling necessary information'.
Revisions or no, this is a horrific bill, that will make the dissemination of accurate but inconvenient information (as we saw during Covid) all but impossible. In fact, I strognly suspect that the resounding success of the medical freedom/dissident movement during Covid is the precise reason all of these dystopian bills are being enacted/put forward around the western world (e.g. Europe DSA, *shudder). Next crisis, might there only be one *truth allowed...
Thank you Rebekah, for being my trusted source of the political news worth knowing, in what I was once lulled into believing, was a thriving democracy.
What was done to colonized people, all around the world, including indigenous Australians, is now being done to all of us. Being treated as though we are less than human. The negating of our human rights. The negating of the humanity of human beings.
When commerce becomes our God, what chance do the standards of decency, compassion and integrity have? As the wealthiest few at the top of the pile battle to see which can accumulate the most wealth and power, we, and the Earth are merely collateral damage to them. The human spirit of brotherly and sisterly love for our fellow humans is what unites us and is our strength.
David Bell has since made a similar argument. I had not necessarily thought about it at length in the information sector though. Thanks, you've given me something to mull on.
To much ambiguity, which will only work in favour of governments, NGOs, “authorised” media & social media, etc. And we know that MSM is not going to push anything that doesn't support the ‘official' narrative.
Australia is one of the pilot countries for the UN and WEF programs. Let's hope that today's population still has the 'Eureka' bravery of their forefathers.
🙏 Government and MSM should be held to a higher standard than an individual and I tried not laugh at the use of transparency as no doubt in will be withheld from the public due to commercial in confidence agreements with social media
p15/16 “the ACMA could require digital communications platform providers to make and retain records relating to misinformation or disinformation posted by individual end-users, or relating to complaints made by end-users about misinformation or disinformation. It is possible that in making such a rule, the ACMA could effectively require digital communications platform providers to make and retain records that include personal information.”
The ACMA claim that collecting your personal details is justified to achieve a “legitimate objective”.
Thanks for the heads up! Looks like I will have to write to a few people in Government again. So, Health and Banking would be protected industries which can't be criticized online (except if done using satire and jokes)? At least we can still report the Govt. itself for online "harm" and "inauthentic behaviour". The whole thing is still pretty disturbing censorship, sigh, but the ACMA always like to copy the EU on everything.
Well, I mean good that it had to be revised and some exemptions remain but still bad in that it exists at all and that the government of this country is entirely sold-out to the predator class.
Thanks for the link to the new legislation, I also find this aspect deeply problematic...
14 Meaning of serious harm
For the purposes of this Schedule, serious harm is:
[...]
(c) vilification of a group in Australian society distinguished by
race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity,
intersex status, disability, nationality or national or ethnic
origin, or vilification of an individual because of a belief that
the individual is a member of such a group;
Regarding "gender identity", including those with Autogynephilia who DEPEND on being recognised as a woman for their sexual gratification:
I think the legislation has to intentionally exclude the claims of Serious Harms that have arising from Statements of Objective Truth.
Thinking of another place where I could end up cancelled, I don't actually credit the idea that ALL the gay people were "born gay", given the science showing such large numbers were victims of early sexual abuse, or early grooming (see latest children's book publicised by Anthony Albanese which includes illustrations on how to have anal sex) exacerbated by taking place at a time of sexual awakening.
I also think that people who rejected dangerous and unproven medical treatments should be included in that section (c).
I was feeling happier, right up until I read about the Corporate Government getting a free run for disinformation on vaccines.... But wait.... AGAIN the wording is really bad... "harm [..] to the efficacy of preventative health measures" ... You can't harm EFFICACY with words - public health measures either have efficacy or they don't. Who is writing this stuff??
In the first round of public consultation my submission was not published, but I questioned the logical construction in the wording:
-----
"Regarding Schedule 9, Part 1, Section2, Harm Definitions
(c) harm to the integrity of […] government institutions;
It isn’t possible to ‘harm’ the integrity of a government institution. It either has integrity, or it doesn’t.
It is only possible to shed light on failures in integrity."
-----
And there's a similar failure in logic in the new legislation.
A vaccine is either efficacious (to some level) or not. You can't change that efficacy by providing data on vaccine failure.
A vaccine is either safe (to some level) or not. You can't change the safety by pointing out great holes in assessment.
I might write to my local member and senators.
#irritated
But very well written, Rebekah.
As Bret Weinstein noted accurately, 'there is no way to control bad information without controlling necessary information'.
Revisions or no, this is a horrific bill, that will make the dissemination of accurate but inconvenient information (as we saw during Covid) all but impossible. In fact, I strognly suspect that the resounding success of the medical freedom/dissident movement during Covid is the precise reason all of these dystopian bills are being enacted/put forward around the western world (e.g. Europe DSA, *shudder). Next crisis, might there only be one *truth allowed...
Yes, that's why my recommendation in my submission to the consultation phase was that the bill is unworkable and must be scrapped.
Thank you Rebekah, for being my trusted source of the political news worth knowing, in what I was once lulled into believing, was a thriving democracy.
What was done to colonized people, all around the world, including indigenous Australians, is now being done to all of us. Being treated as though we are less than human. The negating of our human rights. The negating of the humanity of human beings.
When commerce becomes our God, what chance do the standards of decency, compassion and integrity have? As the wealthiest few at the top of the pile battle to see which can accumulate the most wealth and power, we, and the Earth are merely collateral damage to them. The human spirit of brotherly and sisterly love for our fellow humans is what unites us and is our strength.
"What was done to colonized people, all around the world, including indigenous Australians, is now being done to all of us"
This reminds me of an article I read in 2022 which made a great impression on me, framing globalised public health as neo colonialism:
https://onlyagame.typepad.com/only_a_game/2022/04/decolonising-public-health.html
David Bell has since made a similar argument. I had not necessarily thought about it at length in the information sector though. Thanks, you've given me something to mull on.
Thank you for the link Rebekah, a long but worthwhile article. Medical colonization is the current strategy of the cabal.
Lots of meaningless words from the guvmint, but this bloke got it right ..... "a “shoddy attempt at censorship”.
To much ambiguity, which will only work in favour of governments, NGOs, “authorised” media & social media, etc. And we know that MSM is not going to push anything that doesn't support the ‘official' narrative.
Australia is one of the pilot countries for the UN and WEF programs. Let's hope that today's population still has the 'Eureka' bravery of their forefathers.
🙏 Government and MSM should be held to a higher standard than an individual and I tried not laugh at the use of transparency as no doubt in will be withheld from the public due to commercial in confidence agreements with social media
I read the explanatory document over the weekend – there is also a privacy/surveillance concern.
https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/ems/r7239_ems_13b01a0b-4684-4e0e-b336-0028d4c0e3cd/upload_pdf/JC014003.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf
p15/16 “the ACMA could require digital communications platform providers to make and retain records relating to misinformation or disinformation posted by individual end-users, or relating to complaints made by end-users about misinformation or disinformation. It is possible that in making such a rule, the ACMA could effectively require digital communications platform providers to make and retain records that include personal information.”
The ACMA claim that collecting your personal details is justified to achieve a “legitimate objective”.
Thanks for the heads up! Looks like I will have to write to a few people in Government again. So, Health and Banking would be protected industries which can't be criticized online (except if done using satire and jokes)? At least we can still report the Govt. itself for online "harm" and "inauthentic behaviour". The whole thing is still pretty disturbing censorship, sigh, but the ACMA always like to copy the EU on everything.
Wow. Some good news for once!
Well, I mean good that it had to be revised and some exemptions remain but still bad in that it exists at all and that the government of this country is entirely sold-out to the predator class.
Haha, yep, it's less bad than it was.
Thanks for the link to the new legislation, I also find this aspect deeply problematic...
14 Meaning of serious harm
For the purposes of this Schedule, serious harm is:
[...]
(c) vilification of a group in Australian society distinguished by
race, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity,
intersex status, disability, nationality or national or ethnic
origin, or vilification of an individual because of a belief that
the individual is a member of such a group;
Regarding "gender identity", including those with Autogynephilia who DEPEND on being recognised as a woman for their sexual gratification:
I think the legislation has to intentionally exclude the claims of Serious Harms that have arising from Statements of Objective Truth.
Thinking of another place where I could end up cancelled, I don't actually credit the idea that ALL the gay people were "born gay", given the science showing such large numbers were victims of early sexual abuse, or early grooming (see latest children's book publicised by Anthony Albanese which includes illustrations on how to have anal sex) exacerbated by taking place at a time of sexual awakening.
I also think that people who rejected dangerous and unproven medical treatments should be included in that section (c).
I wondered if, under these laws, Sall Grover's entire X feed would be banned...
I'm sure that's the actual purpose for the legislation, along with the vaccine silencing. ;)