In this episode of Australia Censored the Institute of Public Affairs’ Director of Law and Policy John Storey provides an update on some crucial developments that affect free speech in Australia.
The overturning of the court injunction taken out by Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant against the social media company X, shows how unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats cannot be trusted with the power of censorship.
The recent stabbing attack of Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel in Sydney has been exploited by Ms Inman Grant to impose online censorship according to her world view. This alleged terror attack has also been exploited by the federal government to push forward with even worse censorship laws in the form of their proposed Communication Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill.
This brings into focus the dangers of censorship that John and his guests have been discussing on Australia Censored so far.
The solution to misinformation is free speech, not unelected and unaccountable bureaucracies with vague powers which grant them the ability to determine what Australians should and should not be able to say, see and think.
Below is a transcript of the show.
Scott Hargreaves:
We need the contest of ideas. No one has a monopoly on truth.
Professor James Allan:
They can’t point to anything other than contested argument. Here’s their definition of misinformation. If you disagree with me, that’s misinformation.
Andrew Lowenthal:
And it’s an extremely anti-democratic way of viewing the world, and it’s coming from the people who see themselves as the defenders of democracy. And so there is this new kind of elitist guardianship, the best counter to disinformation is free speech.
John Storey:
The federal court has just dealt a massive blow to Australia’s, eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant. The court has denied the eSafety Commissioner’s application to extend an injunction on footage posted on X of the Wakeley stabbing last month. This shows the eSafety Commissioner having complete and total disregard for online freedom of speech, and it reinforces the concern that proposed misinformation laws will be abused for political purposes. This graphic footage of the stabbing of a priest in Wakeley was rapidly shared around the world on social media. As terrible as this attack was, it might’ve been an opportunity to confront some difficult issues facing the nation. Yet, instead of asking some questions about why this attack happened, the federal government tried to censor the footage from the internet. Julie Inman Grant ordered social media companies to take down footage of the knife attack from their platforms, not just in Australia, but globally.
Inman-Grant went so far as to take X to court because it wouldn’t censor the footage to her satisfaction. Remember, the content has been and will continue to be blocked for Australian users. Inman Grant’s demands for global censorship had been denied, at least for now. The Prime Minister also weighed into the debate by saying, quote, “Surely there is now a recognition that misinformation is a problem on social media.” The comments by the Prime Minister are both wrong and concerning. Misinformation laws are about allegedly false information, yet the footage of the knife attacks was not in fact false or misleading. The calls to censor the footage reveal the real agenda behind the federal government’s proposed misinformation laws and how they will work. And it will be unelected bureaucrats like Julie Inman Grant who will decide what mainstream Australians can see online based on their own preferences and activist agendas. Australia and other nations are pushing forward with Draconian rules that censor free speech on the internet.
As Australia Censored continues, I’ll be talking to more thought leaders about what is happening, why, and what should we do to preserve free speech. To find out more about the IPA’s research or to join, visit our website at ipa.org.au.
