As long as we don't challenge their policies you mean?
See the long running COVID thread for tons of examples.
Also.
https://europerenaissance.com/2023/11/06/a-new-law-is-about-to-kill-free-speech-and-democracy-in-australia/A bill on fighting what the Canberra regime describes as ‘misinformation and disinformation’ and ‘harm’ aims to empower a government agency to police online expression.
The Australian government has recently introduced in Parliament a new law proposal to ban officially unapproved online content. Digital companies are expected to adopt a code of conduct which will see them censor speech based on broad, vague and far-reaching directives.
The Communications Legislation Amendment (Combating Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill2023 foreshadows the imposition of a legal obligation on digital platforms to monitor alleged ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’. If that does not work, the law proposal provides for the full empowerment of the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) to directly intervene for the purpose of preventing ‘harm’.
Section 2 of the proposed legislation defines ‘harm’ as follows:
(a) hatred against a group in Australian society on the basis of ethnicity, nationality, race, gender, sexual orientation, age, religion or physical or mental disability;
(b) disruption of public order or society in Australia;
(c) harm to the integrity of Australian democratic processes or of Commonwealth, State, Territory or local government institutions;
(d) harm to the health of Australians;
(e) harm to the Australian environment;
(f) economic or financial harm to Australians, the Australian economy or a sector of the Australian economy.
In other words, shut up and do as the government tells you.The concept of ‘harm’ peddled by the bill is illusory, and its content would be determined by a powerful crony-appointed government agency. The definition of what is and what isn’t harmful is malleable and can expand and contract depending on ACMA’s prevailing views.
Ultimately, any type of speech with which the government is uncomfortable could be deemed ‘harmful’. For example, describing ‘disrupting social order’ as serious harm could be interpreted as stopping the organization of legitimate political protests. This could certainly be used to suppress legitimate political speech that should be part of a functioning democracy.
