Australian authorities have proposed new laws to target online disinformation, but critics have slammed the measures, saying they could lead to over-policing and a crackdown on “dissent”.
“The Misinformation Bill introduced in Federal Parliament today is a horrific attack on Australians' free speech rights. The new bill expands provisions on censorship of speech that were not even included in the Government's fatally flawed first draft,” said John Storey, director of legal and policy at the Institute of Public Affairs. He told Sky News.
Mr Storey called the proposed legislation “the biggest attack on free speech in Australia's peacetime history”.
Australian Communications Minister Michelle Rowland announced the plans on Thursday, telling parliament the legislation aims to combat misinformation and disinformation, which she described as a “serious threat” to Australia's “security and wellbeing”.
International manhunt underway for man accused of 'most despicable' crimes
The law would impose fines of up to 5% of global revenue on companies that promote misinformation for failing to prevent its spread and would require tech companies to set up codes of conduct for tackling misinformation through designated regulators.
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese (centre) delivers a speech at the Leaders' Assembly of the 2024 ASEAN-Australia Commemorative Summit at the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre in Melbourne, Australia, 6 March 2024. (Joel Catlett/Pool via Reuters/File Photo)
The law also provides for prison terms of up to seven years for doxxing (when an individual posts someone's personal information online or uses that information to exploit them) and allows parents to sue for “serious invasion of privacy” regarding their children. The Guardian reported..
The government repealed the previous law in the face of widespread criticism, with the Australian Free Speech Coalition arguing that the new law fails to address “key issues” raised in the original effort “despite an outpouring of public concerns”.
Judge rules in landmark case for transgender woman against women-only app
The new law has drawn equal outrage across the media, with Elon Musk calling the Australian government “fascists” in a terse tweet about the issue. Labor's Permanent Secretary Stephen Jones hit back, calling Musk's comments “insane” and insisting the issue is a “sovereign” one.
“Whether it's the Australian Government or any other government in the world, we assert our right to make laws that protect Australians from scammers and criminals,” Mr Jones said in response.
Attorney General Mark Dreyfus during a question and answer session in the House of Representatives of the Australian Parliament on August 22, 2024 in Canberra, Australia. (Tracy Neary/Getty Images)
story, A statement released last year When the government revealed its intention to go ahead with developing penalties for suspected disinformation, the committee called the effort “disingenuous” and argued the government was “attempting to confuse the protection of Australians with Federal Government plans to give bureaucrats in Canberra the power to determine what is the official truth”.
“The federal government is cowardly exploiting concerns about current tensions in some communities and the fears of parents and others about harmful online content to push forward with legislation that would essentially impose political censorship,” Storey said.
'Historic breakthrough': US lifts defense trade restrictions with key allies to counter China
Authorities allege the country faces a foreign threat from influence spread through social media platforms and are concerned about how this could affect federal elections due next year. According to the Economic Times.
At the top of Anzac Hill in central Alice Springs, Indigenous and Australian flags fly as a crowd gathers for a smoking ceremony with traditional owner Kumarie Kungwarrai. Indigenous Australians' reaction to the result of the vote for the Indigenous Voice Parliament on 14 October 2023, which failed to receive a majority of votes. (Tamati Smith for The Washington Post)
But the government softened its stance on some measures, such as narrowing the scope of information that is “verifiably … false, misleading, or deceptive” or “reasonably likely to cause harm,” and exempting “reasonable distribution of content for academic, artistic, scientific, or religious purposes.”
Click here to get the FOX News app
This issue was brought into sharp focus during the Indigenous Australians Voice Referendum, which would have amended the Australian Constitution to give constitutional recognition to Indigenous Australians. Although the bill was ultimately rejected, the furor surrounding the vote included allegations of misinformation being spread, which caused great concern to officials.
One example was the claim that the body formulating the referendum could confiscate property and land if the bill was passed, or that people would have to pay rent to indigenous people if the bill was passed. The New York Times.
