While the US election was happening, the Australian government has pushed through, in the house of Representatives, the new MAD Bill - Mis and Dis information bill.
As far as I understand it, it will control and censor what we're allowed to say online, even more than now.
This website explains it better and if you scroll down you can sign the petition before it completely passes through and becomes law!
How many votes before the matter has to be read officially?
At least 69
Signed!
As far as I understand it, it will control and censor what we're allowed to say online, even more than now.
Yeah nah. It will give power to the ACMA to punish platforms that aren't doing what they say they're doing. All of them claim that they take down harmful content but often they don't. It stops them from making broad claims that they're policing it when they actually don't.
Also, how much does the government control and censor what you say right now? I'd be curious to know examples of how it's already bad before claiming it's going to get worse.
Rioting in England over false claims about a stabbing death
Gun man shooting in pizza shop over pedophile ring claims.
This sort of stuff is getting very common, often driven by $$$ for clicks/views. It’s almost certainly cost lives, and is getting worse. Law changes won’t fix it, but should at least apply a brake in the mainstream.
Perhaps riots are not just from one single cause or issue , there were many things that apparently were building up in these communities to do with policing and taxation and decades of neglect and it’s all being framed as racism so the government could sweep all their failed policies under the rug .
Britain is now a failed state and it’s time Australia stoped following their extreme dud policies ,
A free press and freedom of speech is THE Cornerstone of Democracy .
To Begin to restrict Free Speech because of ideas you don’t like is the beginning of the end of Freedom at all .
Open discourse and debate is the way to mediated thoughtful ideas that have traction into the future.
@beach bum: Only Adelaide and Melbourne. Why?
You said personally observed. I gathered you meant directly, but now assume you mean "personally observed through the pinhole camera of social media and Tiktok".
That pinhole camera sure has a great field of view though! 🙈
@LlamaOfDoom: Social media and tictoc ; no sorry never used these .
The central government over there has been pulling money out of regional councils and services for the last 20 years, in an austerity drive.
Regional cities and towns have been run into the ground along with services like health, policing, housing and council funding for anything beyond the absolute essential .
I don’t really know what you’re upset about but maybe ask why you are being fed a certain view too.
@beach bum: You have asserted Britain is a failed state by your personally observed metrics, none of which you have personally observed?
I just don't think you fully comprehend what a failed state is.
Anyway, good luck to you in your quest for unreserved free speech which definitely could not be racism.
@LlamaOfDoom: Ok , cheers so stabbing kids and people getting upset is racism ,thanks for clarifying your talking point..
@beach bum: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Southport_stabbing
If you're referring to this, people getting upset about stabbing is justified.
I'm keen to see which part of the public response wasn't racist given the perpetrator was a British born citizen and not racially (correction:religiously) motivated by all official accounts.
@LlamaOfDoom: There’s Racists off the starboard bow
starboard bow
starboard bow
There’s racists off the starboard bow
starboard bow
starboard bow Jim
da dada da
Genuinely curious - what rules do you apply for capitalisation in your writing?
Maybe not a failed state but definitely in a big mess and yes, Australia does not want to follow in their footsteps. They certainly have a two-tier policing and justice system - that's plain to see.
@R4: Yes , failed state may be a little exaggeration.
Turning into a 3rd world country might be closer the truth.
'harmful'. Yeah vague terms. Also forgot what happened during covid? Government, corporations, media.. . All in it together spouting bullshit
I do remember what happened during covid.
On the flip side, vaccine deaths have been 14 out of the 68m or so doses administered so far.
Yeah nah read the bill next time as it's that and a whole lot more.
Such as? I see recording and reporting requirements placed on platforms, forcing them to put in proper complaint systems and ACMA powers to boost up the voluntary codes platforms already sign up to, but what OP is saying isn't in there at all.
but what OP is saying isn't in there at all.
If these proposed regulations are a nothingburger in your mind, then what kind of legislation passed by the parliament would you consider to be a danger, making Australians subject to a CCP style government?
Is it a case of you'll know it when you see it?
As far as I understand it, it will control and censor what we're allowed to say online, even more than now.
How is the government censoring what we say online right now?
Well it's obvious, the way they are doing it is ***** *** ******* ****** ***** ***** ****** ** ***** *****.
I can't believe you didn't know this already!
DisabledUser12556 in 3..2…1…
RIP me
1…2…3…4
@WhyAmICommenting: We gave him some shock therapy and he’s fine now…
3….2…1..now.
Oops .
We lost him.
next
They censor your passwords automatically.
This is mine: *********
"This is mine: ozbargain"
Not a very strong password
.
Really?
hunter2
this prompted me to head back to bash for a laugh… and it's all gone (again)! 😨
Misinformation and disinformation are very real problems, it's good that something is being done to combat it.
When has your life been affected by so called misinformation, disinformation? The whole idea is to ask questions and find out by different answers . It's kind of like this platform , and remember if the situation arises where you've liked or posted a comment the government body doesn't like .
Did I mention the government is exempt from this legislation !
It's affected every day… Even in these forums you get people parroting crap about covid vaccines or anti-climate change rhetoric as examples. Or you can go back further with the anti-NBN crap which set our internet infrastructure back at least a decade.
Not sure you realize how much crap information is out there and how much people are buying into it. That then ends up with people arguing hard against things that are good for them and government not implementing change at end of day and setting Australia back.
OMG! And there we have the perfect example of why this bill must me quashed. Imagine not being able to question the lies and propaganda and not having a choice whether to buy into it or not because the information has been prohibited as wrongthink? I can attest that the government is exempt from their own laws because I never get a response after I report them (and the ABC) for blatant 'misinformation'. It's OK when they do it I guess. Funny thing is that we condemn past governments around the world for book-burning but cheer when ours do it.
(If you were being sarcastic but were too subtle for me to notice then pleas ignore the above.)
@EightImmortals: You're welcome to question it.
The problem is when 3 years later you're still here arguing against it even though it's been demonstrably proven as effective and safe. Then it just becomes misinformation and would ideally be blocked so others aren't being harmfully influenced.
Look at the current news around whooping cough. It's the highest rate it's ever been due to anti-vaxxers. A completely safe and proven vaccine that now people are getting sick from and babies are dying because of people like you parroting crap about vaccines. It's sad.
@EightImmortals: Ooof. See? This is misinformation. And the fact I'm being downvoted is simply awful for simply stating the truth.
If you can find strong evidence to support your claims feel free to send it through, but you won't because it doesn't exist. At best you'll point to one or two outspoken people but nothing empirical.
I do know you're a bit on the fringe conspiracy side on this website though and nothing will change your mind as it's decided. So it's a bit of a waste trying to show this to you.
@DingoBilly: Yeah cause what murkymervv said was misinformation…. Definitely deserves those down votes. How awful
If you can find strong evidence to support your claims feel free to send it through, but you won't because it doesn't exist. At best you'll point to one or two outspoken people but nothing empirical.
In relation to pertussis, the Warfel et al study showed it didn't prevent transmission or infection in their baboon study. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24277828/
The implications of this are profound. Basically, people have been deceived into believing they are doing the right thing by getting the shot (which isn't just pertussis, it's included with the diptheria & tetanus antigens along with excipients & adjuvants & whatever other contaminants, including foreign dna, were unable to be filtered out) to protect infants in particular, when in reality they would be unknowingly acting like plague carriers.
You might be surprised to read in this paper: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6616129/
the following admission:
"Finally, aPV pertussis vaccines do not prevent colonization. Consequently, they do not reduce the circulation of B. pertussis and do not exert any herd immunity effect."
Of course, you could claim the above isn't "strong evidence", or you could claim I'm cherry picking, or that baboons aren't humans, or any other number of reasons. However, the Warfel study is at least empirical evidence, so you are wrong on that count.
@DingoBilly: @DingoBilly. Thank you for parroting the narrative. Do you have any robust evidence that the pertussis vaccine is safe and effective. I think not. Have you looked at the historical mortality data. I think not. The only truth you are stating is the citing of media reports that are based on opinion without any supporting references.
@DingoBilly: Astra Zeneca vaccine has been withdrawn and they have acknowledged the vaccine caused serious blood clotting issues. Imagine if that was the only vaccine the govt ordered and, because of this bill, you weren’t allowed to hear about the dangerous side effects? You are unfortunately proof that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
@iCandy: Oh? I didn't realize that the few people that died of the blood-clotting conditon was much worse than the risk of dying from covid! Thanks for pointing it out.
How many people died from covid and how many from the blood-clotting again just so I can make sure I get my stats right? I wouldn't want to be misinformed with my little bit of knowlesge that the vaccine prevented more deaths than caused them!
Oops. Looks like your argument falls apart pretty quick doesn't it? 😭
@DingoBilly: Because Astra Zeneca wasn’t widely used. You would know that if you read more than MSM. You’re still proving why this bill would be harmful.
Oops. Looks like your argument falls apart pretty quick doesn't it?
So, you're ok with sacrificing some people to allegedly protect the majority, even though transmission effectiveness was never tested in trials. Even though those dead people, if they hadn't taken the countermeasure, had a pretty good (over 95%) chance of recovering from the illness, and that, shocking as it is to hear, from the military no less, that it was a "low risk infection": https://www.defense.gov/Multimedia/Videos/videoid/742071/?dv…
"So I think people should recognize at the end of the day, this still remains a low risk infection to not just our service members but to the American public, and that we are really good as a hospital system, as a medical care system, from both the EMT up to intensive care units, at taking care of these. I'm not minimizing it, I'm just saying that even in the absence of a vaccine." Dr. Nelson Michael, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research 5 March 2020.
@DingoBilly: Nobody knows how many people died from Covid. We only got figures about people dying with Covid. Two very different things. We also don't know how many have died from the vax as it's not reported and doctors are afraid to blame the vax.
Your argument falls apart very quickly.
There are hundreds of studies from medical experts available that prove the vax didn't work but you ignore them all and just believe what the government tells you .
No intelligent person would be happy with the government deciding what is true and what isn't.
@DingoBilly: Look up John Campbell , he did a lot of analysis with covid . I wouldn't be quick to judge , and when has there been a time in history that celebrities have had to endorse a vaccine because it's life saving?
@DingoBilly: Here's just one example if you dare to watch
https://youtu.be/LE69BeayEzA?si=XszFsbu2zTwQSBTN
None of that would fit the definition of 'harm' in the bill.
What is an example of a specific 'problem' that has occurred that this bill would fix?
@CaptainJack: ? Anti-vax sentiment has caused significant issues and rises in diseases because of morons. It's pretty straight-forward…
Nothing wrong with anti-climate change 'rhetoric'. You may or may not agree with it but it should be allowed to be expressed unhindered. It's all part of the discourse of a functioning democracy. Same goes for most other topics. Some speech needs to be challenged but the list is very short.
Asking questions is fine. It's the statements of unsupported claims that is the problem.
You can ask, "how do we know the Earth is a globe?" and find out exactly why that is the case.
But it's not appropriate for you to just state that the Earth is flat, when all evidence points against it.
Sure, but it's also not appropriate for government to prohibit you from looking at the evidence for a flat Earth too (if there was any that is). It's way more dangerous to live under such tyranny than it is to have a few harmless loons getting around. As for simply making claims without offering any evidence then you make a fair point. I find the opposite to the the problem, in that a lot of people simply refuse to look at any evidence that might shatter their apriori beliefs on a topic.
(Before the usual howler monkeys descend, No, I don't believe the Earth is flat. Maybe banana-shaped though)
@EightImmortals: Let's pick a better example then, let's say that someone is making videos stating that drinking cleaning chemicals would cure you of cancer, or increase your intelligence.
No opinions come into play here, it's well understood that these chemicals cause harm when ingested and nothing to suggest otherwise. These videos would directly contribute to harmful outcomes so presumably this is the kind of thing the ACMA would be able to target. I'm okay with that!
@FezMonkey: OK for the sake of hypotheticals, what particular cleaning chemical did you have in mind and what dosage?
While you are probably right in your assessment, if the basis of your claim is 'everyone knows' then we have a problem as the number of times over history where something that 'everyone knows' to be true of false was proven otherwise is huge. So I would like the opportunity to investigate all claims and decide for myself, and if I discover the cup full of draino was not such a good idea then I will have learned a valuable lesson I will carry through the rest of my life. And that's another factor in this discussion, making mistakes, small or large is how we learn, otherwise we just remain as gullible infants at the mercy of whoever is controlling the narrative. Now are some people stupid enough to drink draino? Probably. Is it worth sacrificing our ability to have free discourse in society and the ability to research our own choices just to protect them? I don't think so, but others might have different opinions.
Lets pick another example which is not a hypothetical of what happens when government becomes the sole source of 'truth'. Remember the reefer madness days when government renamed 'cannabis' to 'Marijuana' (language engineering always proceeds social engineering) in order to fool everyone into thinking it was a new dangerous drug that made you want to shag black guys and kill people? Or when they lied about the Gulf of Tonkin or WMD's or many many other things? This is the kind of thing that happens when we allow government (or whatever the authority structure in a particular society is) to have that amount of power. The fact that the bill exempts government main stream media should be an obvious wake up call in itself. Always be wary of anyone who seeks to limit your access to information, it's a game that's been going on for a lot longer than our current form of government.
@EightImmortals: Yep what a joke. If the government's serious about misinformation, then let's start by censoring everything they get wrong.
Rules for thee but not for me.
It's the statements of unsupported claims that is the problem.
Yes like "safe and effective ". That is the unsupported claim here. The very limited testing didn't prove these claims, it was about making money for big pharma not about saving lives.
The whole idea is to ask questions and find out by different answers
It should be like that, but (and I know this is going to sound bad, and I'm going to cop flack) I don't know if I trust the average person to be able to do that. People fall for bullshit they've read online all the time. In most cases, it's annoying and inconsequential, but sometimes it's a slippery slope and in extreme cases it can even lead to radicalisation. I mean, look at stuff like QAnon - these people are so far down the metaphorical rabbit hole that there's almost no chance they can be pulled out.
It's kind of like this platform
Ozbargain is different, because every. single. opinion. is challenged. But what about other places online where opinions go unchallenged? There are echo chambers all over the internet where misinformation festers and is regurgitated.
From what I can gather from the bill, even forums like these would have to have guidelines imposed
@scotty have you had a look over the bill?
@spackbace: Nope.
However I am assuming every government initiative that dictates what are mis/disinformation and forces their removal without a debate, is not for the good of online communities. OzBargain would have to change its moderation policy if that's the case. We do unpublish mis/disinformation (when they are obvious to the mods), but if we have any doubt we would prefer to let the community chat over these things.
Also I think it's important to distinguish between opinion and fact.
Opinions can be debated and discussed.
But where we have established fact supported by evidence, experiments, observations; then it's not really up for debate. If someone wants to improve or correct it they can present their evidence and how it also accounts for all the existing data.
So this is where the mis/disinfo does harm.
@FezMonkey: Problem is a lot of people have already decided their opinions (usually the ones they've been spoon-fed all their lives) and beliefs ARE facts. They are the ones that reply with name-calling when they read something that triggers them. :)
@EightImmortals: Yes emotions can make discussion difficult.
Not every issue can be boiled down to a purely factual answer, but where it can, well "the truth has nothing to fear from inquiry"
But where we have established fact supported by evidence, experiments, observations; then it's not really up for debate.
If you're referring to science, then yes it is always up for debate! The last 5 years seems to have taught people to 'trust the science', but the scientific method as it's supposed to be is the opposite of this.
One example for me, living in an area with poor mobile reception, is that a proposed mobile phone tower was knocked back following a campaign from people protesting about the dangers of 5G.
I still remember when the antivaxxers shared a photo of a little girl who purpotedly died from the vaccine. I did a reverse image search. It was a photo of one of the Sandy Hook victims. I cannot imagine being her parent.
(profanity) everyone who makes things up to further their personal agenda.
It’s terrible and awful but it’s the price of freedom, once you go down the road of censorship , there is no end .
So we have to live with misinformation and propaganda and learn to use tools that help to identify veted and fact checked information .
There are those tools available for sourcing your news feeds etc .
Can you imagine if political parties were not allowed to knowingly lie! That would be amazing. Alas, that would highly favor one side of the political spectrum so the powers that be can't have that.
No one is suggesting you can't suggest and explore alternatives but when you have politicians running on "vaccines don't work", "renewables don't work", "climate change isn't real and coal isn't bad for the world" you have a serious misinformation problem and it has a very real affect on everyone's day to day lives.
Alas, if those crooks were forced to tell the truth the right would never see the inside of a chamber of power again.
"Immigrants are not the cause of any of your problems but we are going to blame them anyway because we know you are a bunch of closet racists!!" Actually, that might still work in Oz.
Data literacy is unfortunately lacking in general society. In reality it's probably something that needs to be taught in schools so that people from very young can learn the skills to look at what they see online critically.
One example of mis/disinformation that affects many would be those 'grocery store walkers', the ones who walk through stores cherry picking single ingredients from foods as bad and saying that food is therefore bad.
Some people see these videos and develop eating disorders as a result.
Misinformation and disinformation are very real problems,
Is this something new ?
Rubbish
Problem is, it's being done by the least trustworthy people in the country and theirs will be the only source of truth. Be careful that you are not caught disagreeing with them.
From governments and the media, who have been spewing crap for years, yet they are specifically excluded from the bill. Funny that.
(profanity) Aussies are weird.
Censor me harder government…
How about we just take some personal accountability, the best antidote to bad speech/false speech is good speech/truthful speech.
Letting the government decide what is "bad speech" is a predictably bad path to go down.
I am sure the website MADmustgo will have a balanced and level-handed description of this legislation for me…
TL;DR?
Yes
Put it through my Acrobat AI assistant, here is a TLDR; for everyone:
Digital Communications Platforms: The bill defines digital communications platforms and sets requirements for providers to manage misinformation and disinformation, including risk management, media literacy plans, and complaints handling.
ACMA Powers: The Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) is granted powers to create digital platform rules, obtain information, and enforce compliance through civil penalties and remedial directions.
Misinformation and Disinformation: The bill defines misinformation and disinformation, outlining the conditions under which content is considered harmful and the responsibilities of platform providers to address it.
Transparency and Reporting: Digital platform providers must publish information about their policies and risk assessments related to misinformation and disinformation and report to the ACMA.
Misinformation Codes and Standards: The bill allows for the development of industry codes and standards to combat misinformation and disinformation, with the ACMA having the authority to approve, request, and enforce these codes.
Exemptions and Limitations: Certain digital services, like email and non-interactive media sharing services, are exempt from some requirements. The bill also respects freedom of expression and limits ACMA's powers regarding private messages and VoIP communications.
Consequential Amendments: The bill includes amendments to other related legislation, such as the Australian Communications and Media Authority Act 2005, to align with the new provisions and ensure comprehensive regulation of digital communications platforms
Annual Reporting and Reviews: The ACMA is required to prepare annual reports on the operation of the new provisions and conduct periodic reviews to assess their impact and effectiveness.
It actually seems pretty robust to me.
Also, yes.
Ugh, more dealing with the ACMA? I already have to do that enough with my TCA1 forms every day….
That tldr needs a tldr
.
Imagine starting a petition in support of Russian election interference and destabilization, AI-generated click bait from Indian SEO factories, and pseudo-scientific scare campaigns against common sense public health initiatives…
We still on the Russia Russia Russia hoax are we?…
Good summary (and outlines the baseless hysteria that came in nice and early in the thread)
The article isn't very clear on what the ACMA can and can't do:
1. "These takes — built around the assumption that ACMA would have some kind of power to censor online content that it deemed incorrect — are misleading or mistaken."
2. "ACMA can then penalise these digital services if they don’t follow their own rules. If ACMA is unhappy with its efforts, it can also come up with its own industry standards that the companies must follow."
1 is contradicted by 2. Does the bill empower the ACMA to apply an industry standard that requires these platforms to remove content that meets criteria for being harmful and misinformation?
Is there a petition for more bargains