Only a government pushing lies has to censor the people: The ACMA Ministry of Misinformation Bill

Misinformation laws. ACMA Ministry of Truth.

The Ministry of Truth will control your every online conversation

By Jo Nova

The Censors are always the bad guys

The only way to fix misinformation is with better information.

Dear Australians, we only have until Monday to lodge a submission against the proposed  amended Misinformation bill.

It’s a bill so bad warnings are coming from the far side of the world

The Cato Institute warns that if Tech companies take the simple route and comply with the Australian proposal Americans using mostly American companies may be effectively subject to misinformation rules set by foreign governments (and that may be the point, eh?) The great leftist global machine gets “help” with every country conquered by censorship glue.

Why do the guys with galactic megaphones need to shut you up?

Suppose misinformation was harming Australians, what stops the government giving us the correct information? They have the billion-dollar ABC, the billion-dollar CSIRO, the entire tamed academic sector, every school in Australia (they’re all funded and controlled by the government) — and yet somehow against this, an unfunded mum or dad writing on Facebook or a blog might harm trust in government institutions and therefore must be shut down, before any harm even occurs?

Think about what this says about the Australian ABC? It must be pretty useless if it can’t save Australians from verified lies? Things could only be this absurd if it doesn’t have any truths to refute “the lies”, or it doesn’t have an audience because it’s an odious propaganda machine no one wants to watch. Or both.

The Labor government claims that they won’t be censoring content, which is a lie, the media “platforms” will be forced to do it for them. If the platforms don’t comply, the government will send men with guns to their door to take away 5% of their global income. Even if the fine is never issued, the instant this law comes into effect, the threat of being savagely fined will mean platforms will be censoring Australians.

How would we keep comments open on this blog? Ask everyone to write satirically?

Ban anything that may be contributing to harm that might happen, maybe

The legislative bomb is a multifunctional octopus. It pretends to prevent “serious harm” but the proposed legislation defines misinformation as  anything “reasonably likely to cause or contribute to serious harm”. So there are three legalistic qualifiers there for any sympathetic judge to crush dissent. What’s “reasonable” — depends on whether you can afford a QC. What’s “likely” to cause harm (but hasn’t actually done it) is anyone’s guess or the work of seers and soothsayers. And a “contribution” to serious harm might be just about anything. Did you retweet that scientific study showing that Antarctica isn’t warming? You’re harming the planet, the government energy policy, killing the spotted quoll, and damaging financial prospects for solar manufacturers. Stop that now!

Thou shalt not harm the government, the economy, the bankers, or government health plans

It’s hard to believe they revealed their real intentions so obviously. This bill is not designed to protect the people, it’s designed to protect the government. What’s the worst kind of  “serious harm” you can do to an Australian — harm the government, or their referendums. (The Labor Party are so hurt they lost the “Voice” vote last year.) It’s the first thing they list.

Read their own words in Amendment 14:

For the purposes of this Schedule, serious harm is:
(a) harm to the operation or integrity of a Commonwealth, State, Territory or local government electoral or referendum process; or
(b) harm to public health in Australia, including to the efficacy of preventative health measures in Australia; or
(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; or
(d) intentionally inflicted physical injury to an individual in Australia; or
(e) imminent: (i) damage to critical infrastructure; or (ii) disruption of emergency services;
in Australia; or
(f) imminent harm to the Australian economy, including harm to public confidence in the banking system or financial markets;
that has:
(g) significant and far-reaching consequences for the Australian community or a segment of the Australian community; or
(h) severe consequences for an individual in Australia

The second thing on the list are words that harm “preventative health measures” which means vaccines — the biggest, worst and most expensive preventative measure the government ever forced on the people.

The third priority is to outlaw any harmful words against their favourite protected mascot groups. So if you think women in one religion are being mistreated or harmed, you can’t say that. If you think children are being hurt by anyone in a protected mascot class, you’re not allowed to say that either. The laws will hurt those they claim to “help”.

It’s revealing that the other protected class are the poor suffering bankers. You must not “harm public confidence” in banks or financial markets. Presumably pointing out that banks are technically insolvent might cause a bank run. Don’t mention that bankers make money from printing our national dollars from thin air, effectively profiting by loaning money they don’t have, which would be called counterfeiting if anyone else did it. Shh!

Lastly, if you think someone is doing criminal activity don’t say so, because it might have “severe consequences for an individual”. Is that what the Labor Party meant to say — let’s protect criminals?

Who decides “the truth”?

Apparently it’s not God, it’s ACMA — The Australian Communications and Media Authority.

Apparently, it’s the team with the most money. Only a billionaire, or a government, could afford to set up a “third party fact-checker”.

The number of people up in arms about these rules grows by the day: Nick CaterPhillip Altman. Roger Pielke JnrCaldron Pool. Australian Citizens Party  and The Cato Institute.

Please copy your submission below to inspire others. Phillip Altman has a list of Senators emails to cut and paste.

REFERENCES:

The Bill: Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024

The 69 page proposed legislation PDF form and Word doc.

Submissions close on the 30 September 2024. (General advice on how to make a submission).

Submissions can be uploaded here (button on the right column) or emailed to the Committee Secretariat below.

Committee Secretariat contact:

Committee Secretary
Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications
PO Box 6100
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
Phone: +61 2 6277 3526
[email protected]

h/t to Andrew M, David Maddison, Stephen Neil, Nick Cater

 

10 out of 10 based on 20 ratings

15 comments to Only a government pushing lies has to censor the people: The ACMA Ministry of Misinformation Bill

  • #
    Ronin

    Comments like ‘ If you don’t know, vote no’ would be the first to go.
    They are still butthurt from the ‘Voice’ loss.

    130

  • #
    Simon Thompson M.B. B.S.

    The system is about to reset. Would you like to schedule a time?

    20

  • #
    Honk R Smith

    ‘You must not “harm public confidence”’.

    Uh … what confidence?
    Jeez, there’s barely any left now.
    The last of it will be gone after this.

    150

  • #
    John Michelmore

    Thanks Jo, We mustn’t give up.

    70

  • #
    Ross

    I’ve got a really bad feeling about this. What’s the point of any more submissions? The thousands of recent submissions were nearly all ignored. Mostly I’ve got a bad feeling about this because of the lack of publicity regarding the legislation. When you have a referendum etc, there’s a chance that a lot of us plebs will at least be aware of it. Yes/No, gay marriage referendums there were media ads, leaflets in the mail, statements from celebrities, billboards. This legislation is arguably way more important than Australia’s most recent referendums, but here we have it being rushed through parliament without any real introspection. Plus, I think the legacy media like it because they will be able to claw back a lot of news production now going to social media. Just like during COVID, the media bosses will have cosy relationships with government. “We wont say nasty things about you, so please give us all your social distancing, vaccine, face mask ads”. In this case, the legacy media wont be accused of mis/disinformation because they have deep pockets to defend themselves legally anyway. The LNP gave the genesis to this legislation, but were never going to get it passed because of lack of Senate majority. Whereas Labor, desperate to please everyone, will make it happen. Thanks a lot Paul Fletcher and Malcolm Turnbull – not. One thing I’m sure of these days, politics is not the solution.

    90

    • #
      Ross

      To add to that bad feeling, I have also been enlightened recently to the “UN Pact for the Future”. Not by my informative and useful media and politicians, but by social media. Australia has apparently signed up to that too.

      30

  • #
    David Maddison

    Why do you think it’s being fast tracked?

    What’s coming up, the truth of which they want to suppress?

    60

  • #
    el+gordo

    ‘How would we keep comments open on this blog? Ask everyone to write satirically?’

    This blog is fine, it has been a satirical blog since the beginning, but there has always been serious intent. The Bill will probably pass, so good strategy is required to stay alive.

    Turning the place into an academic structure, lectures and tutorials, an extremely informative and hilariously amusing blog would attract greater numbers. I think they might come in the form of blog refugees, the chattering class, and not the rank and file.

    We are on the front line of the information war, dig a trench. The Chinese netizens are in the thick of it.

    00

  • #
    Philip

    Remember Albo’s rage (and the Libs) at the stabbing of that Priest in Sydney? “we must keep the children safe”. Meanwhile, my Neighbour sat down to watch a film on Netflix with her 14 year old son, that he suggests they watch because it’s the latest thing.

    He disappears from the room because he has seen it before, which was strange she thought, apparently, they watch things repeatedly no problem. Next thing there’s a scene where a young boy is drugged by another and a non-complaint buggery scene goes on and on and on (apparently).

    So we must keep the kids safe, but watching Netflix dramas is awesome and nothing to worry about. Good grief. Who put these idiots in charge?

    70

  • #
    David Maddison

    This shows the contempt with which the Lib/Lab/Green Uniparty holds the Australian people.

    And don’t forget it was the fake conservative Liberal faction of the Uniparty that first proposed this legislation and they also created the office of the e Safety Kommissar which is essentially a WEF appointment.

    60

  • #
    R.B.

    harm to the operation or integrity of a Commonwealth, State, Territory or local government electoral or referendum process

    Does this apply to crap said at protests?

    Why are protests, which force people to listen to misinformation, OK to leftards, but blog posts that are voluntarily read are subject to censorship?

    The media portrayal of protests shows you how much bias will be in these judgements. If the media is for the protestors, cameras are placed low and everyone of the dozen fill up the screen. Against, cameras are high up and panned out till they look like a handful of ants. Or worse. Channel 7 News Adelaide showed protestors to a drag queen reading to children, then a separate group of very muscled men in all black and masks that looked like actors. The leftards make choices every day to misinform.

    10

  • #
    SteveR

    I lodged a submission but the site then reverted to “lodge a submission” page. How do I know if it has been successful?

    10

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>