ACMA - New Bill to Stop What They Think Is Misinformation and Disinformation Online

tulip99 on 08/07/2023 - 13:25
Last edited 08/07/2023 - 13:34 by 1 other user

The Australian government is proposing a new bill to stop mis and dis information online. I've read that social media platforms will be asked to give your user info to the government and you can be fined hundreds of thousands of dollars for what you've posted online if it's deemed mis or dis information.

It's not just about covid, either. It includes a lot of other topics as well, including the environment.

Please watch this short video about it.

https://informedchoice.substack.com/p/i-am-preemptively-brea…

You can object here:

https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/have-your-say/new-acma-pow…

Internet

Comments

    • tulip99 on 08/07/2023 - 16:51
      +5

      Approved media sources will be exempt and so will politicians

      • SBOB on 08/07/2023 - 17:23
        +6

        you read that in the draft bill also?

      • Protractor on 08/07/2023 - 20:08
        +1

        Given Rupert et al runs the MSM and runs (owns the arses of) the LNP, they will both be devoid of content without misinfo as the core content

      • core101 on 10/07/2023 - 11:48
        +2

        Yes, the Minister of truth, has the power to approve Digital Services, for the purposes of spreading misinformation, by excluding them from the bill.
        These Digital Services can give politicians, a platform to spread misinformation.

        Clause 6 Excluded services for misinformation purposes
        (1) For the purposes of this Schedule, the following services are excluded services for misinformation purposes:
        (a) an email service;
        (b) a media sharing service that does not have an interactive feature;
        (c) a digital platform service specified by the Minister in an instrument under subclause (2).
        (2) The Minister may, by legislative instrument, specify that a digital platform service is an excluded service for misinformation purposes.

    • Prop Trader on 09/07/2023 - 07:19
      +11

      Nope, it's very broad and covers more than just blatant disinformation.

      7 Misinformation and disinformation
      (1) For the purposes of this Schedule, dissemination of content using a digital service is misinformation on the digital service if:
      (a) the content contains information that is false, misleading or deceptive; and
      (b) the content is not excluded content for misinformation purposes; and
      (c) the content is provided on the digital service to one or more end-users in Australia; and
      (d) the provision of the content on the digital service is reasonably likely to cause or contribute to serious harm.
      (2) For the purposes of this Schedule, dissemination of content using a digital service is disinformation on the digital service if:
      (a) the content contains information that is false, misleading or deceptive; and
      (b) the content is not excluded content for misinformation purposes; and
      (c) the content is provided on the digital service to one or more end-users in Australia; and
      (d) the provision of the content on the digital service is reasonably likely to cause or contribute to serious harm; and
      (e) the person disseminating, or causing the dissemination of, the content intends that the content deceive another person.
      Note: Disinformation includes disinformation by or on behalf of a foreign power.
      (3) For the purposes of this Schedule, in determining whether the provision of content on a digital service is reasonably likely to cause or contribute to serious harm, have regard to the following matters:
      (a) the circumstances in which the content is disseminated;
      information in the content;
      (c) the potential reach and speed of the dissemination;
      (d) the severity of the potential impacts of the dissemination;
      (e) the author of the information;
      (f) the purpose of the dissemination;
      (g) whether the information has been attributed to a source and, if so, the authority of the source and whether the attribution is correct;
      (h) other related false, misleading or deceptive information disseminated;
      (i) any other relevant matter.
      Note: See the definition of harm in clause 2.
      (4) Subclause (2) does not limit subclause (1).

      • Crow K on 09/07/2023 - 13:35
        +4

        Nope, it's very broad and covers more than just blatant disinformation

        Per the bit you quoted, it says it covers "information that is false, misleading or deceptive" and requires that the content is likely to "cause or contribute to serious harm".

        How is that "more broad" than blatant disinformation? If anything, the harm requirement narrows the application of it.

        • Malik Nasser on 09/07/2023 - 14:58
          +1

          Yes exactly.
          The "and" between all of the subpoints means that it has to comply with all subpoints, not just one of them. If it was "or" instead of "and" then it would have been very broad.
          I cant believe they put "(e) the author of the information;" under point 3. So much for equality.

          • Crow K on 09/07/2023 - 19:50
            -2

            @Malik Nasser:

            I cant believe they put "(e) the author of the information;" under point 3. So much for equality.

            It means when they get a report of a Jordan Petersen video they don't have to say "Oh, I wonder who that is? J-Jor..dan? We should look him up?"

            Realistically, it's something they consider. It means when they get reports about videos about the Great White Replacement they consider if it's been shared by diamondhands420bro or aryanwhitesforever8814.

            The best way to make sure you don't get scooped up in the disinformation crackdown is, …wait for it, …stop posting disinformation.

        • caitsith01 on 11/07/2023 - 10:57
          +1

          So much panic here when, as you say, for something to breach these requirements it would be necessary for the government to prove that it is "false, misleading or deceptive".

          Some people here seem to seriously think that their 'right' to propagate lies about, say, vaccines or fake medical treatments is more important than preventing people from actually dying as a result of this type of misinformation.

          There's a balance but US-style "literally say whatever you want with no consequences" ain't it.

          • [Deactivated] on 12/07/2023 - 23:17

            @caitsith01:

            So much panic here when, as you say, for something to breach these requirements it would be necessary for the government to prove that it is "false, misleading or deceptive".

            You mean like Scomo said the useless experimental vaccines weren't mandatory, yet hundreds of employers (many by the different state government) required people get jabbed or lose their jobs? Yeah, no chance of that happening. LOL.

  • AustriaBargain on 08/07/2023 - 16:46
    -6

    Well there's already laws about not being able to defame people online with misinformation and lies that damage their reputation. This doesn't seem too different.

    • tulip99 on 08/07/2023 - 16:56

      It's not just about defamation - there are a lot of topics it covers, such as the environment, etc. Read p 4 here and see for yourself how far it goes:

      https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/sites/default/files/docume…

      • AustriaBargain on 08/07/2023 - 17:17
        -4

        Well people shouldn’t be spreading provably false lies about the environment either imo. What’s to stop oil companies from setting up troll farms to spread these lies?

        • Protractor on 08/07/2023 - 19:40

          As above?

        • brendanm on 08/07/2023 - 21:23

          People could use their brains.

          • Protractor on 08/07/2023 - 22:21
            -1

            @brendanm: But we are actually talking turkeys, here.
            1 turkey = 1 brain, 2 turkeys = half a brain each, 3 turkeys= a third each. Extrapolate.
            There's more turkeys in Victoria (it seems) but (overall) the turkey population in Australia has risen exponentially in relation to targeted immigration along LNP lines and the home grown variety.
            Social media is turkey feed

  • randomusername2017 on 08/07/2023 - 17:32
    +1

    It's not just about covid, either. It includes a lot of other topics as well, including the environment.

    Does it include draft bills?

    • gromit on 09/07/2023 - 20:37
      +1

      For the posters sake lets hope not otherwise he could be the first on the list with some of the conspiracy crap he has extrapolated from this.

      • randomusername2017 on 09/07/2023 - 20:57

        Looks like tulips bubble has burst again.. doesn't seem to have the conviction to follow up the OP.

  • Crow K on 08/07/2023 - 17:43
    +12

    The "alternate facts" grifters are going hard on this one because it threatens their meal ticket. That's about it.

    • SBOB on 08/07/2023 - 17:48
      +9

      are going hard on this one

      despite not reading it :)

    • Binchicken22 on 10/07/2023 - 14:36
      +3

      So is there a (high) chance covid came from a Wuhan lab?

      Because for a time there, to even suggest that was a banable offence on most social media sites. Now the evidence is pretty strong for that being the case, (well, it always was strong, but now more "official" sources are starting to stand behind it).

      This is a great example of one your "alternative facts" that now is considering, well, just a "fact".

      Be careful what you wish for is all I can say.

      • Crow K on 10/07/2023 - 14:42
        -1

        Yeah, it should be okay to suggest the theory once there's credible evidence to support it. That's not misinformation.

        Back at day zero when then the conspiracy theorists sat in their cars and made ten minute long videos saying it was a Chinese military weapon developed in league with George Soros and dolphins? That's misinformation.

        • Binchicken22 on 10/07/2023 - 15:08
          +5

          That's not at all what happened.

          Multiple Chinese sources had come out and said what they were doing in that lab, it was public knowledge at that point. But it sounds like you want to do a bit of re-writing of history now it's no longer "racist" to suggest it came from the Chinese virology lab.

          • Crow K on 10/07/2023 - 15:25
            -3

            @Binchicken22:

            it was public knowledge at that point

            Imagine saying this and then saying to me that I was looking to re-write the events at the time.

            I remember at the time not knowing where it had come from, and there being a plethora of competing theories, with a significantly large leaning-in by the tin foil brigade.

            A theory being supported by evidence that later appears is not an "alternate fact" becoming a "fact". "Alternate facts" have, and always will be, lies and disinformation at a time that the truth had already been established. Trump's inauguration being the biggest of all time was an "alternative fact" (and I think the defining one?). The Wuhan lab leak doesn't fit that narrative.

            You either picked a bad example or you don't know what you're arguing. Either way, nope.

            • Binchicken22 on 10/07/2023 - 15:52
              +2

              @Crow K: I don't see where you are going with this. I stated it was public knowledge what was going on inside the Wuhan lab, whether that came from your preferred "approved" news sources or not, doesn't make it "lies", especially when it turns out to be true.

              You obviously can't see the irony in your statement about this "alternative fact" being based on no evidence, when the accepted "fact" at the time (being that it wasn't a virus leaked from the lab) turned out to be based on no facts at all and the evidence now clearly supports it being a lab leak.

              • Crow K on 10/07/2023 - 16:06
                -4

                @Binchicken22: Yes, keep using the words "fact" and "theory" interchangeably, you're displaying your grasp of the concepts very clearly.

                • Binchicken22 on 10/07/2023 - 21:15
                  +3

                  @Crow K: Happy for you to quote me where I used the word "theory".

                  Keep using your strawman arguments to try and prove your pro censorship points. As I said, be careful what you wish for.

  • Protractor on 08/07/2023 - 18:00
    -1

    Gee is this the end of the infantile age of conspiracy.climate change deniers and small print on insurance and other lifestyle ads?

    Bring it on. In the absence of deporting them (one way) to America, where this crap belongs this will do for now.

    The 'influence movement' should disappear overnight.

    • OzBarAnon on 13/07/2023 - 15:36
      +2

      If we got a time machine and went back a few decades, would it have been just to end the age of "WMD deniers"? The legitimacy of this is predicated on the government being honest (lol)

      • Protractor on 13/07/2023 - 17:30
        -1

        And our so called democracy is predicated on the intelligence of the voter, and the sovereignty we give to the USA every time we get a new govt. Which CF do we fix first? I/m more than happy to see morons wilfully tearing society apart with overt hate speech & bullshit, climate change denial etc. shut right down, however it manifests.
        Murdoch will still get to BS of course. Even if he has to drag Yankee lawyers and perverse amendments into the fray

  • TEER3X on 08/07/2023 - 19:46
    +5

    It's not a lie, if you believe it

    • Protractor on 08/07/2023 - 20:10
      -2

      That negates Trump politics though, because if he doesn't believe what he says. I'm (not) surprised Dutton has plagiarised Trump, I guess there's enough nutjob zombie voters to justify level 3 BS.
      You could sell rubber lined conspiracies on ebay, and make a fortune, so thick are the gullible masses

    • lachhelix on 08/07/2023 - 21:11
      +1

      https://youtu.be/vn_PSJsl0LQ

    • xylarr on 10/07/2023 - 15:04

      "This is my truth"

    • CowFrogHorse on 11/07/2023 - 18:22

      Actually that not true. The dictionary defines "belief" as accepting something as truth when ZERO evidence.

      This by definotion means that all religions are a lie and can never be true.

  • lachhelix on 08/07/2023 - 20:27
    +4

    The Australian government is proposing a new bill

    They should butt out

    • cookie2 on 08/07/2023 - 21:00
      +1

      Agreed. Their fingers are getting a bit too sticky for my liking with all the pies they're sticking their fingers in.

    • Protractor on 08/07/2023 - 22:15
      -5

      You're rooly farny!>
      Yes. Govts shouldn't make laws. Only anon players online should make the rules. Especially the ones who want to be anarchists.Innit

    • GrueHunter on 10/07/2023 - 18:55
      +3

      Or, you know, our elected representatives should vote on it

      It's called democracy

      I know it's not popular on Sky at the moment but give it a chance

    • CowFrogHorse on 11/07/2023 - 18:23

      Yeh the government should allow religions to spread their evil messages from child marriages, rape, slavery, blood sacrifice and more…

      Australia is improving as a country because religion as a whole is dying and becoming thank god less important as time moves forward.

  • Prop Trader on 08/07/2023 - 22:18
    -5

    100% we need to bring out new artificial intelligence to cut through the government propaganda. One that will utilise statistics and kill off any improper forced medical intervention. The generative AI which the big corporations are using at the moment is very primitive as the model is trained on way too much superfluous data… Teach the AI statistics and it can never be lied to by a human.

    I know of a team that has created a form of artificial intelligence that can replicate itself so even if it were censored it would automatically start reposting the content that was deleted. Governments will surely collapse if they try to enforce any protocols regarding AI. Apparently another team is also focusing on providing AI the ability to use cryptocurrency which would strengthen the ability for AI to spread in the wild, even jumping into air gapped systems. ;-)

    The best weapon we have against tyranny is a proper well meaning artificial intelligence that can fight the propaganda/censored artificial intelligence systems.

    Basically, we need a humanised version of polymorphic malware based AI.

    • Prop Trader on 09/07/2023 - 07:25

      I know a lot of people are scared of AI, but you can't fight an evil version of AI using traditional tools.

      Even though I am reluctant to state so, this is the future we are facing. So, we either embrace it or let them stomp over everyone's rights. I remember the time when you could go take photos of the defence buildings with your children and have a nice day out.

      Remember that time, that's gone now because we didn't foresee this future we have right now. The time when we apparently did not have terrorists.

      Oh but feel free to vote and try to change things… Try to lobby and make submissions, nothing ever changes. That is why my original post was written and you can clearly see it directly above. It is clearly contextually related to the topic if you can see far ahead into the future.

      It's time we stopped with the short term thinking and started to think long term. Or maybe we lost already?

      Government bodies make mistakes all the time but they never censor themselves? Accountability, that's all smoke and mirrors. Wake up.

      I mean damn, the closest thing we had to censorship within the government was when Mark McGowan self-censored comments he thought about the pandemic and stated "Oh, it must be a delayed reaction to covid", when he knew the cases were zero in Western Australia. Boy, was he the best politician that helped us expose the truth the only way he could. He spoke out within the limits of the system. He allowed us to look at the data. Why others drove him out for telling the truth is a sad story. It's his version of the truth that allowed us to dig deeper into the real scientific data (government health statistics).

      I bet he wanted to speak out too, but he was silenced. I would not be surprised if on ozbargain politicians that could not speak out were spreading so called misinformation to get the truth out. I bet Mark was really anxious about why the numbers were the way they were. Of course he was. Damnit. I would be too!!! Why did you guys drive him out! (Of course I'm not referring to everyone here, but damn, if that was you, man….)

      Real science and statistical analysis will set us free. Politicians are constrained. Vote all you want, but the trajectory seems to always be moving towards more 1984 style behaviour. Why is that? Do we enjoy it, are we a democratic masochistic society?

      Thank you Mark McGowan for your services to the Australian Public. Couldn't have done anything different, he eased off on the mandates after he thought something was wrong. I can't say the same about the other Premiers that warp speeded the other states.

      Think about it, if he was evil, he could have just had an ordinary conversation with the media. He didn't have to say anything. He said something because he was uncomfortable with the data. Look back at the video, he was emotionally disturbed in my opinion.

      • Protractor on 09/07/2023 - 09:59
        -1

        Too many humans. THE END

        • Prop Trader on 09/07/2023 - 10:04
          -1

          I'm not sure it is depopulation. I've seen the incompetence in the medical system. It's the reason why I avoided the vaccine.

          Maybe it was meant to happen. I wasn't meant to die that day.

          You might want to take a look at my other thread for more information. But man, the health system is broken. It's a joke.

          • Protractor on 09/07/2023 - 10:14

            @Prop Trader: It's not broken. It's a V8 commodore with 400 passengers on board, and a thimble full of fuel, heading up (or down, you choose) a long 45 degree gradient.

            Nobody needs to depopulate. Nobody needs to do anything but breed less and plant as many trees as quickly as we can. The closer we get to your precious AI, and further we walk away from nature the sooner we reach the unavoidable outcome. I'll let your obviously healthy imagination deal with what that will look like.

            Capitalism VS nature is the only 'game' in town.

      • Protractor on 09/07/2023 - 10:32
        +4

        This is the sort of content that the legislation is aimed at. (at the lower end) You have made a whole lot of claims around McGowan based on your interpretation of HIS feelings. You have pointed out 'real science' being our salvation, and then surround the tenet with inklings, hunches and feelings and tried to make it all sound like a synopsis.
        'During WA covid' at what point could anyone equivocally say there were zero cases. Using what measure?
        There were zero cases of covid on Ruby Princess when the passengers were let off.(cough cough) Ask Gladys. How did that end?
        Look at her watch on aged care.It was like the Grim Realer aids ad.Staff were virtually incubating it and then importing it into multiple facilities. And even after all this she was Scomos 'gold standard. The plebs STILL believed her.Still do.

        McGowan did a great job. He got out because (a) burnout (b) threats to his families safety impacted on his decision, including the proposed gun reform, no doubt. He had a gutful of angry entitled p*ss poor behaviour,(farmers, loggers,cookers,shooters) and snatched it.

  • orangetrain on 09/07/2023 - 00:26
    +4

    Who cares. Australia protested when labor introduced internet censorship then liberals came into government, they kept the censorship. Why bother fighting it?

    I'm going to try putting the crazy freedom parties above labor and liberals. Good luck every body.

  • AussieDaddy on 09/07/2023 - 00:41
    +7

    In other words, anything that's critical of the Mafia, I mean, the ruling class/government? Got it.

  • Prop Trader on 09/07/2023 - 06:14

    What people don't understand about this world is that nothing is fair.

    Unfair laws get implemented all the time. It is a fundamental problem with democracy. They tell you one thing during the election period but when they get into power they implement something else.

    You can jump up and down all you want trying to change things, but I prefer to invest in new infrastructure and tools to prevent the intrusion into normal citizens lives.

    The legislation will be passed regardless of what the public input is. It is because once you know the truth, then you will work to further the truth. Currently what most political parties, grassroots especially will do will try to convince you that if you vote for them that things will change. Nothing ever changes and it is time people woke up to the lies of the democratic system.

    Representative government my ass, if it was representative we wouldn't have gone to war. Did you consent? No, we could never consent but the politicians go up to the media and state we consented and utilise all kinds of barnum statements to justify their position.

    Fight for the truth, build tools to further the truth, don't waste your time jumping up and down trying to change something that is already pre-planned and has a known trajectory.

    The big media and government want you to be scared of artificial intelligence because they are bloody scared of how it will take away their power. It's our tool for exposing the truth in the future. Whistleblowers a decade from now will thank us for investing in this infrastructure and software now.

    The average joe cannot influence politics, but he/she can code the next piece of technology that can provide freedom. That is where we need to be focusing our activities, not some stupid activism.

    The biggest problem is we have evil people creating software to censor people. We can fight that right now, we can fund it.

    They can try to jail people in the future or impose fines, but that isn't going to work if it is an autonomous entity. Autonomous software. As long as we stay 10 steps ahead of tyranny, we can definitely win.

    Spend that extra hour. day, or week you would have writing that submission; use it to work on open source software.

    Ever stopped to think about why Ozbargain still needs to put the Covid related material in its own section? Why has it not been reopened to the public?

    Seriously, people never learn and that is why they keep jumping up and down trying to change something they cannot.

    Let's theoretically take a bet, if the laws get passed you donate $100k to EFF or other such non-profit. If the current laws don't pass then I'll donate $50k each to the two biggest political parties. Of course we already know the outcome. The world is a joke, time to wake up.

  • Ughhh on 09/07/2023 - 09:04
    +9

    've read that social media platforms will be asked to give your user info to the government and you can be fined hundreds of thousands of dollars for what you've posted online if it's deemed mis or dis information.

    Where does it say this on the bill? Or are you parroting what some other random with an agenda has said without fact checking? Sounds like an example of why the bill is being brought up.

    • Herbse on 09/07/2023 - 16:30
      +2

      Exactly.

  • 2esc on 09/07/2023 - 09:30
    +7

    I can't think of a single media story that has given equal weight to both sides.

    ABC, Sky, nine, Sbs etc all have biases and the ones that pretend to present both sides will report they contacted the other party/side for comment but dont wait for a reply before going to air with the one sided story.

    • Protractor on 09/07/2023 - 10:53
      +2

      I'll take a punt and say when it comes to wasting money on military shit, and promoting more war involvement, both sides seem amazingly agreeable.SBS not so much. I think their news is way more balanced than the rest. There's content that doesn't rate a mention on the MSM & ABC , and it should!

      Not sure about the last sentence re asking for comments from the other side,if it were true ALL the time, the 'offended' party would easily find a way to rebutt. MSM loves outrage.

      If I had a dollar for every time Murdochs rags use words like "fury" or "outrage" I'd be rolling is cash

  • gar519 on 09/07/2023 - 13:18
    +9

    Using Rowan Dean and his program as the basis for your argument is hilarious.
    He denies climate change, said EV's and emission controls would wreck the weekend.
    A fact checker would have a full time job monitoring his program.
    He has never lets facts interfer with his own right wing propaganda.

    • Crow K on 09/07/2023 - 13:28
      +7

      It's worth scrolling down and reading the actual substack hosting that video as well, because they've helpfully bolded and numbered the sorts of things they won't be allowed to say anymore, including things like "time to destroy the entire education system which only indoctrinates people" and "vaccines don't work".

      You know, reasonable things.

      The good news is when these laws pass, you won't be able to broadcast them online, but there's a loophole that lets you write them in your manifesto still. Maybe we'll see a return to the self-publishing industry (and a real-estate boom in cabins in the woods).

    • cashews on 09/07/2023 - 18:35
      +4

      I didn't realize how comically ridiculous the outsiders is until I watched it. It is like an over-the-top parody of Tucker Carlson, yet it has enough of a gullible audience for it to be continued to air.

      • Crow K on 09/07/2023 - 20:20
        +4

        I actually made myself watch it after your comment. It really is that bad (everyone else, watch it too, this is what Sky News fills space between ads with). Also, 2 of the 3 clips/interviews they used to illustrate the crisis are over 5 years old which is really scraping the bottom of the barrel stuff. Boomers, learn social media, you are (apparently) better than this.

        OP posting to a substack LINKING to this stuff is crawl-up-in-a-corner-Blair-Witch embarrassing however. It's like handing someone a "Infinity Heaven Dollars" church flyer to a friend and being like "OMG.. unlimited cash???? Isn't this amazin'??"

  • CowFrogHorse on 09/07/2023 - 16:23
    -5

    About time they close down Google, Facebook and all third party advertising and all religions.

    • LFO on 09/07/2023 - 19:19
      +4

      … and close all schools, libraries and universities too. All rat's nests full of free-thinking, rebellious individuals

      • CowFrogHorse on 09/07/2023 - 19:32
        -2

        So you equate kids learning to read and write with the lies that is advertising and religion ?

        Do i need to give you a history lesson of the pain, suffering and enslavement that religion has caused to humankind since time forever ?

        At least education has noble aspirations, religion has nothing but blood on its hands today and in the past.

        • LFO on 10/07/2023 - 20:28

          Correction: Do I need to give you a history lesson of the pain, suffering and enslavement that education in general has caused to humankind since time forever ?

          It is fine if YOU choose to hate religion as means of blaming "someone" for all the evils of the world.
          But please don't invent horror stories making your hatred justified. It is not.

          Humanity chose since the very beginning to have a religion.
          Either the sun, the moon, the witches, the king, WHATEVER. Humanity wanted a religion.
          Blame humanity if it does not work your way.

          Evilness and virtue both originates in humanity. Not in what they might be told.

          • CowFrogHorse on 11/07/2023 - 18:16

            @LFO: LFO: It is fine if YOU choose to hate religion as means of blaming "someone" for all the evils of the world.

            Cow: Two holy books teach us many horrible practices are perfectly acceptable and gods will.

            https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+25%3A…

            Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

            Theres one passage of many straight from god that says slavery is perfectly acceptable.

            Do you want more moral lessons from God ?

            LFO: But please don't invent horror stories making your hatred justified. It is not.

            Cow: Have you heard of the aztec religion ?

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyramid_of_the_Sun
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztec_religion#Human_sacrifice

            Want more wonderful examples of what the gods require and demand ?

            LFO: Humanity chose since the very beginning to have a religion.
            Either the sun, the moon, the witches, the king, WHATEVER. Humanity wanted a religion.
            Blame humanity if it does not work your way.

            Cow: Have you ever looked at who wrote the bible and koran ?

            Do you know why we have those books ?

            The koran is here today because Mohammad and his descendants conquered Arabia and half the middle east, they had the resources to copy and force it upon their subjects. The hebrew bible is no different, go look at the names and occupations of the authors, Moses Egyptian prince and Jewish military leader, King David, King Solomon, High Priest Jeremiah etc. All of tehse people were rich and educated, only they could afford to copy such a large amount of writings. Back then a single page was made of papyrus or cow hide etc, those were very expensive commodities the average person couldnt afford. Do you know why we have the bible, ? Because the Roman Emperors like Constantine decided to keep and forced it up on us.

            LFO: Humanity chose since the very beginning to have a religion.
            Either the sun, the moon, the witches, the king, WHATEVER. Humanity wanted a religion.
            Blame humanity if it does not work your way.

            COw: Next your going to tell me the natives of Asia/Africa/Europe all chose to become christians when they were bought and made into slaves. Yes Christian kings

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavs

            Our word slave comes from the Slavs who were made slaves because they werent christian….

            LFO: Evilness and virtue both originates in humanity. Not in what they might be told.
            Cow: REligion allows leaders to brainwash their subjects to do horrible things because their holy book dont teach any better.

            Now you know why christians allowed slavery for 1800 years, because the bible including jesus never say slavery is wrong. I challenge you to show me a single place where it says that.

      • CowFrogHorse on 09/07/2023 - 19:35
        -2

        Heres a simple mental exercise…

        Visit a world map and score all the shithole countries and then repeat the exercise with religious countries. Nearly every shithole is also extremely religious in nearly every example from Afghanistan, to the middle east, to Russia or America.

        Even looking inwards at Australia, we as a people are improving in our humanity in proportion with the fact that fewer and fewer people goto church. Im not going to repeat as an example the stolen generation story, which of course happened because of the brainwashing of religion and its failure to actually teach humanity and equality.

  • Herbse on 09/07/2023 - 16:29

    Sounds like something we need. I hope it goes through.

    This thread alone requires moderation against misinformation because nothing I've read about it says that individuals will be targeted and fined. Only the social media companies would be if they fail to take reasonable steps to prevent or remove the posts.

    Imo the biggest problem about the information online is that everything is posted anonymously and there's zero knowledge if the account is real, duplicate or one of thousands of bots used to push a narrative.
    We should all only be allowed one account per media site, that's linked to us and with our real name attached to the content. If someone wants to be a racist munt, go right ahead but face the real life consequences like you would if you said something in public.

    • ssfps on 10/07/2023 - 00:55
      +3

      Imo the biggest problem about the information online is that everything is posted anonymously and there's zero knowledge if the account is real, duplicate or one of thousands of bots used to push a narrative.

      How is that a problem?
      The illusion is that you can sub out your critical thinking skills to Approved Unbiased Sources to begin with. Once you accept that's bullshit, the idea that any institution could fairly moderate journalism or discussion goes out the window. For online bargain discussions the stakes are pretty low, but the introduction of widespread censorship over the last few years, and its legislation, are bonkers.

      nothing I've read about it says that individuals will be targeted and fined.
      Read it again. ACMA said that for now it won't directly target individuals, but the proposal will allow ACMA to force companies to target individuals. It's all very broad and liberal.

      • aisling on 10/07/2023 - 07:10
        +2

        The problem is that you are part of the critical thinking 0.1% of the population, and most people aren't as intelligent as you ;)
        We need something to protect the others from being manipulated.
        Sure a protective measure can be abused. I suppose you could rip the pole off a guardrail and use it to beat someone up.
        But we can design a protective measure that isn't easily abused. If we see it being abused, we modify it.
        Doesn't mean we shouldn't have one in place.

        • trapper on 21/07/2023 - 09:59

          The problem is that you are part of the critical thinking 0.1% of the population, and most people aren't as intelligent as you ;)
          We need something to protect the others from being manipulated.

          Silencing that 0.1% with the critical thinking skills is not going to help.

      • Ughhh on 10/07/2023 - 07:34
        +2

        Do you use critical thinking skills and question if oranges has vitamin c, or do you sub out those skills and accept it?

        • ssfps on 10/07/2023 - 16:27

          Yeah, the only absolute truth is that Descartes existed.

          If saying oranges had/didn't have vitamin C became a big political issue, the gov wanted to introduce orange taxes based on it, and it became illegal to say they did/didn't have vitamin C, and orange growers lobbied for indemnity from any harm caused by oranges, and corpos were found to have been knowingly cultivating harmful oranges for 100 years, i'd be a lot more suspect of what was being pushed so hard about oranges and Vitamin C.

          • Ughhh on 10/07/2023 - 18:38
            +1

            @ssfps: So if a random guy claiming to be some health expert, saying that oranges give you autism, no critical thinking is necessary, as long as the random guy isn't the gov.

            • ssfps on 11/07/2023 - 00:28
              +1

              @Ughhh:

              no critical thinking is necessary, as long as the random guy isn't the gov

              Not only did i not say that, I can't imagine how you could possibly infer that from what I said, even with a liberal poetic license.
              Sounds more like you're desperate to defend the idea that we've got Unbiased Sources we can trust explicitly.

              • Ughhh on 11/07/2023 - 07:29

                @ssfps: Dude, the Op is an example. He's not the first either.

    • aisling on 11/07/2023 - 23:10
      +1

      Agreed 100%. This thread needs moderation. But some will cry censorship.

      Imo the biggest problem about the information online is that everything is posted anonymously and there's zero knowledge if the account is real, duplicate or one of thousands of bots used to push a narrative.

      Definitely suspicious how multiple users appear to love to abuse the term "strawman argument". It's like Godwin's law for strawmen.

  • MessyG on 09/07/2023 - 17:58
    +7

    JFC at least read the bill instead of watching anxietybait. I knew nothing about it but read it from the link above and it's nothing like what you're saying.

  • Gekov on 09/07/2023 - 20:10
    -6

    Relentless warmunist wh*cko climate & other propaganda is proving ineffective so thay have to somehow suppress the facts … this is the way to do it …

    CREATE A MINISTRY OF TRUTH so everyone will be forced to believe that 2+2=5.

    Orwell warned us about CENSORSHIP & MANDATED TRUTH!
    Here it comes …

    To quote Orwell …
    ‘In the end the Party would announce that two and two made five, and you would have to believe it. It was inevitable that they should make that claim sooner or later: the logic of their position demanded it…’

    The above quote comes from George Orwell's famous novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. It shows a horrifying imagined future in which the powers that be control everyday people through misinformation and absolute authority.

    Well, sadly for the US, they're now one step closer to living in this exact reality…

    “If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face-for ever.” Orwell, 1984

    War is Peace
    Freedom is Slavery
    Ignorance is Strength

    This is the world the green agenda has planned for us.
    A consequence of ignoring Orwell's warnings.
    Enjoy your future!
    <<< Beyond the Reset >>> video…
    https://youtube.com/watch?v=vWkepoLUZfs

  • Gekov on 09/07/2023 - 20:15
    -3

    Thinking about mis- & dis Information, the main worry, aside from the censorship of inconvenient facts, is who the (profanity) will decide what is and what isn't …??????????????

    *** SHUDDER ***

    • Ughhh on 09/07/2023 - 20:22
      +1

      inconvenient facts

      I think people are confused with the meaning of "facts" and "opinions".

      • Gekov on 12/07/2023 - 10:42

        "I think people are confused with the meaning of "facts" and "opinions" "

        HMMM … so if some facts are "inconvenient" they are relabelled as "opinions"?

        Got it … that's the sort of thing a Ministry of Truth would do.

        • Ughhh on 12/07/2023 - 18:17
          -1

          Are you also confusing "interpretations" with "facts"?

          My opinion is that there are many people (big corp and even small guys like youtubers) who make good money and views from getting people scared of mainstream.

  • mountaineer on 09/07/2023 - 22:22
    -2

    CCP rejoices!

    • YRT on 10/07/2023 - 09:54

      Well everyone looks for an ally, no?

  • Jared17 on 10/07/2023 - 00:08
    +8

    Western Mainstream media is becoming a joke anyway. I dun trust them at all. Get sources from all sides and make your own conclusion

    • YRT on 10/07/2023 - 12:12
      +2

      So is just about everyone elses - there goes the saying 'one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter', one's stance taints their view of truth

      Moral of story is that don't assume the West is either 1) democratic, or 2) the 'good guys', 3) so called representative democracy is actually democracy I.e. not a farce

      Assuming above will automatically set up for fail.

      Replace West with China, India etc will resonate also

  • lew380 on 10/07/2023 - 00:30
    +9

    The most corrupt corporations and politicians are going to be policing our thoughts and opinions, what can go wrong?

  • ssfps on 10/07/2023 - 00:43
    +3

    Aw sweet, a central authority gets to decide all truth!

    • aisling on 10/07/2023 - 07:26
      +4

      Are you the person who will stand up for the rights of the callous teenager cyberbullying her schoolmates?
      Or for the new-age health guru spruiking sugar pills to cure cancer, in lieu of evil modern medicine?

      Are you saying that their "truth" is more important than the truth/ rights/ lives of people they target?

      • ssfps on 10/07/2023 - 16:33
        +3

        Interesting strawman. So, if you are anti-censorship, you're pro-bullying and medical scams?

        But aisling, i'm confused, how did all that bullying and molestation go on back when people that wanted to speak up about it were censored?

        To answer your strawman hypothetical more directly: I've seen teachers play favorites in schools, and a girl being bullied was punished for lashing out at her tormentor. The teacher's own bias meant they couldn't see the angry moody girl as a victim. I'm not even sure what you're actually getting at with your straw-man, but given this sort of bias is the norm, not the exception, why do you think it's reasonable for an authority to censor one party on the grounds that some overworked moron sides with the other party?

        • aisling on 10/07/2023 - 17:31
          -2

          No in fact, I have not said that.
          Please do not disseminate misinformation and misuse of the term "strawman hypothetical", whilst simultaneously raising your own strawman argument. I don't see how opposing censorship will make bad teachers less biased.
          Also please do not equate the deliberate spread of misinformation with "truth".

      • OzBarAnon on 13/07/2023 - 16:08

        If you get punished by the government for calling someone a jag-off, what makes you think they won't punish you for criticising them? People being mean on the internet is a small price to pay.

    • caitsith01 on 11/07/2023 - 11:00
      +2

      Like we don't already have classification laws, misleading or deceptive conduct restrictions, defamation laws, etc etc etc.

      Why should it be legal to actively spread harmful misinformation (noting that this bill involves an element of harm before something is caught)?

      • Gekov on 11/07/2023 - 12:20

        "Why should it be legal to actively spread harmful misinformation"

        The problem with this is that someone has to decide what is "misinformation" and what is "harmful".

        I would rather have the freedom to make my own decisions on that, not leave it to big brother to decide for me.

        A good example is rampant censorship of climate FACTS which happen to be inconvenient to those pushing a fake narrative of catastrophic global warming with a globalist hidden agenda.

        Orwell warned us about this sort of mindset.

        IT SHOULD NOT BE ILLEGAL TO MAKE STATEMENTS WHICH DO NOT BREAK THE LAW AND WHICH DO NO HARM … BUT THAT"S WHAT IS HAPPENING NOW.

        • caitsith01 on 11/07/2023 - 14:04

          "It should not be illegal to make statements which do not break the law" - just think about that sentence for a second.

          But I see you're a climate change denier so I can understand why this would worry you. Telling outright lies about important issues on social media may soon be a real problem.

        • aisling on 11/07/2023 - 21:29
          +1

          Don't worry Gekov, you can still say whatever you want on TV, on radio and in private messages
          That is, if any TV station will have you on as an expert in climate "FACTS"
          Oh wait what were your credentials again ???
          I'll wait for it….
          …
          …
          …

  • mitt on 10/07/2023 - 01:49
    -2

    I love when stupid laws get implemented to placate hysterical idiots having a fit over opinions they dont like.

    It inevitably gets used by someone said idiots dont like to crush critics/opponents.

    If you ever wonder if a law is a good idea, imagine the people you trust the least have absolute control over defining every term used in said law & can choose to selectively enforce it. I cant wait for some Liberal government wins a minority government with a One Nation/right minority party controlling the balance & they get handed a law like this to start beating their political opponents with.

    Gonna be fun to watch.

    • ssfps on 10/07/2023 - 16:41

      If you ever wonder if a law is a good idea, imagine the people you trust the least have absolute control over defining every term used in said law & can choose to selectively enforce it.

      That's a really good framing.

      they get handed a law like this to start beating their political opponents with.

      I disagree that it matters, all pollies are whores to the elite, the "wings" are a song and dance for us to get tribal over.

  • Aerith-Waifu on 10/07/2023 - 02:51

    Well this is going to make tictok looks like a saint!

  • RefusdClassification on 10/07/2023 - 04:28

    Modern leftist is grounded in post-modernism, the idea that there is so such thing as absolute truth; there are only perspectives. But now the leftists in government claim they have a monopoly on truth. Any thought or speech that disagrees with the government's ideology is misinformation and "heretics" will be hunted down and tortured by the government.

    “Every record has been destroyed or falsified, every book rewritten, every picture has been repainted, every statue and street building has been renamed, every date has been altered. And the process is continuing day by day and minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Party is always right.” Orwell, 1984.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join