By: Johanne Pillay
The Communications Legislation Amendment Bill, commonly known as the Misinformation Bill, has stirred debate nationwide.
The bill places a responsibility on social media platforms to manage content deemed false, misleading, or deceptive. However, it has raised major concerns about free speech and the government’s role in regulating information.
Maryka Groenewald, WA State Director of the Australian Christians Party, shared her thoughts on the bill, which Labor is currently advancing through parliament.
“This Bill threatens the free expression of religious and conservative views, often labelled as misinformation,” she said. “It risks silencing voices that dissent from the prevailing secular orthodoxy.“
The Government as the Arbiter of Truth
One of the most controversial aspects of this bill is the potential for the government and social media platforms to decide what is true and what is false. This has raised concerns for many people, especially since differing viewpoints could easily be categorised as misinformation.
Maryka said, “We need to ask: Who defines truth? This isn’t a role for the government or tech companies.”
The issue extends beyond simple censorship. It raises deeper questions about the consequences of allowing any organisation to control public narratives.
“We’ve seen, particularly during COVID, how certain perspectives were initially labelled as misinformation, only to be reevaluated later,” Maryka added.
The Risks for Christians and Religious Expression
The potential impact of the Misinformation Bill on religious beliefs is another major concern. Christian perspectives on issues like marriage or family could easily be categorized as misinformation under this legislation.
“If you’re sharing a Christian viewpoint on certain issues, there’s a real risk it could be flagged as harmful,” Maryka explained.
This raises broader questions about the right to express religious beliefs in the public sphere. The bill’s vague definitions of what constitutes misinformation make it difficult to predict how it might be applied to religious or conservative views, further fueling uncertainty.
The Role of Big Tech and Accountability
The bill also places significant responsibility on social media companies, requiring them to moderate vast amounts of content. However, there’s concern about the lack of independent oversight in this process.
“There’s no independent arbiter, no check on this system,” Maryka said.
Additionally, the bill exempts government bodies and news outlets, which many find troubling.
“If the bill is meant to ensure information is accurate, why are government bodies exempt?”
This double standard raises concerns about fairness and leaves much to be desired in terms of transparency and accountability, says Maryka.
Solutions and Moving Forward
The conversation underscored the need for solutions that go beyond simply scrapping the bill. One suggestion was to foster resilience in public discourse, particularly among young people.
“We need to encourage robust conversations where different viewpoints can be shared and debated,” suggested Maryka.
Another important point was that the government should prioritise promoting media literacy and critical thinking instead of resorting to censorship.
“Rather than controlling what people say, we should empower them to think critically and evaluate information for themselves.”
Article supplied with thanks to 98five.
Feature image: Photo by Samuel Regan-Asante on Unsplash