John,

If that's the case then why doesn't ASIO just issue public warnings when organized campaigns of malice on social media are detected? Leaving the peanut gallery alone is good, but such assurances are no guarantee.

Hi AC,

I find it easier to believe Albo to be making his own decisions. Conspiracy theories require too much complexity for the scale you suspect.

JD

Of course there are bad-mouthed people trying to put other people down. But, how about the old stick-and-stones adage; or giving back as good as you get; or just ignoring it; or, better still, shunning social media.

But, please tell this ignorant old bloke who isn't involved in modern hair-shirt and poor-me stuff, how do these “bullies” get the “private information” of people without help from the “victims “ themselves. I know only what I see being lamented by worry warts and therapists advertising themselves on TV news; and some of the “victims” behave stupidly online, do they not?

I appreciate your response, but you have just made the same comments the usual moaners and groaners make; the sorts of people that Big Brother rushes in to “help” without knowing anything about what is really going on. ‘We'll save you’, sounding like that fat bloke who used to sell mortgages.

On the very sad issue of suicide, I understand from a person working in that area, that most suicides occur in the 65 plus, white male cohort. There are many tangible reasons there, surely more believable than a few nasty words online.

May I suggest that the online angst originates in parents treating their offspring like little princes and princesses instead of imbuing them with the facts of life and the idea of things not always going their way.

If there is a clear need for this legislation then the government should demonstrate it with examples.
What are the top 5 examples of misinformation and disinformation in Australia in the last 12 months?

'We need to be protected from misinformation and disinformation'
- This coming from the same people who literally shake in fear, wet themselves and enter an actual state of shock when asked 'What is a woman?'

Well what the hell are we going to do about the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus?
Are we going to censor Christmas for disinformation too?
Send fines out to parents who lie to their kids?

Australia’s social media ban for minors: Has this worked elsewhere?
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/9/19/australias-social-media-ban-for-minors-has-this-worked-elsewhere

>>In May, Australia passed the Digital ID Bill 2024, aimed at establishing a national digital identity verification system – a voluntary system for individuals to verify their identities online. The launch of the programme is scheduled for December 1, 2024.

“So some people, very cynically, are saying the ban around social media is just to push the government’s decision to implement a digital ID system,” said Lisa Givens, professor of information sciences and director of Social Change Enabling Impact Platform at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University, spoke to Al Jazeera.

“Because if a ban comes in place and we say no one under the age of 16 can have access to a social media platform, that really means that every single user is going to have to prove that they are over 16.” In the process, they would have to join the digital ID system of the Australian government.<<

Fester,

ASIO’s focus is on national security threats. They might act if a disinformation campaign rises to the level of foreign interference or a serious security threat, but their mandate doesn’t cover the kinds of everyday misinformation that can spread rapidly online, like false claims about vaccines or climate change.

Relying on ASIO alone would mean only high-level threats were addressed. The day-to-day spread of misinformation would still occur and these can still cause significant harm, especially when it influences public health or undermines democratic processes. Far-right hate groups, as extreme example, feed off the holocaust denial that circulates social media.

Social media platforms, on the other hand, can monitor and manage content in real time, and act much faster to prevent disinformation from going viral before it can cause widespread damage. That’s why the legislation targets platforms, ensuring they take responsibility for the content shared on their sites and document their efforts for transparency and accountability.

The other problem with saddling ASIO with such a burden is that their efforts would often only be reactive. The aim of this bill is to be more proactive, ensuring that harmful disinformation is tackled at the source by the platforms that host it, reducing the need for government or security agencies to step in after the damage is done.

By requiring platforms to act, the legislation strengthens the overall defence against disinformation without having to wait for intelligence agencies to issue warnings, which may come too late to stop harm.

Managing high level threats seems a good reason to employ ASIO to warn people and requires no special legislation. As for the lesser misinformation that concerns you, how might it be determined as such? For people like anti-vaxers, they have always been part of the mix, so why persecute them for holding opinions that are very unlikely to change? Gosh, some even believe that powering Australia with wind and solar is not only possible, but can be achieved economically and without trashing the environment. Should those people be persecuted too?

What happened to the idea of using argument to counter misinformation? Isn't the Voice a good example of sound argument prevailing over misinformation?

Bringing in ASIO on censorship of opinions is well beyond overkill.