Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

I’m very concerned about the state of free speech in this country, especially with regard to free speech online. Frankly, anyone who’s been paying attention to what’s happening in politics over the last few years should be equally concerned.

The most obvious incursions right now are Labour’s nationwide social media ban for under 16s and this government’s initiative for requiring ID to create a Google or Microsoft account.

The Australian eSafety Commissioner has been gifted a great deal of power over how Australians use the internet under the Online Safety Act of 2021. The commissioner can issue removal notices, enforce financial penalties, set standards for content moderation, and create industry codes and standards that online platforms must adhere to.

Prior to the recent election, the under-16 social media ban bill was passed on the understanding that YouTube would be exempt from that ban. Now, just months later, the eSafety Commissioner has proposed that YouTube be included in the ban.

We weren’t allowed to see the research that inspired the proposal. This alleged research showed that YouTube was “driving users down rabbit holes they’re powerless to fight against.” But days later, following a Freedom of Information request from a journalist, that research was revealed to be a simple survey with absolutely no mention of opaque algorithms or rabbit holes anywhere in the 23-page document.

Not only that, but as of the 27th of December, the eSafety Commissioner intends to create industry codes which require Google and Microsoft to enforce age and other identification verification for users.

The rationale is apparently to protect children from harmful content online. Obviously, everyone wants children to be safe online, but the question is: what’s actually the best way to approach and achieve this? That’s a discussion that requires the balancing of various rights and outcomes.

It’s also an initiative that we have an international precedent for without requiring this level of government oversight. The United States did this in Texas and Louisiana when they demonstrated that instead of placing checkpoints across the entire internet, they could focus on those websites which specialise in such material.

So, are we more concerned about the tech and financial capacities of those websites than we are of the privacy of Australians? Well, the way our government’s doing this will require every Australian to verify their ID, possibly with digital ID or biometric data. It’s not actually clear yet, and they’ll have to do that to use these services.

So, one has to ask, is this really about protecting children online, or is it simply a Trojan horse for a massive data and identification collection exercise, one which establishes a precedent of providing ID at every step of using the internet in Australia, if you can believe that?

Remember also that we’re told that digital ID was, of course, going to be voluntary in Australia. We’ve heard that a few times over the course.

To be clear, a few months ago, the Australian Parliament passed the bill that would require age verification for social media, and it did so on the basis that YouTube would be exempt. Now that exemption’s in doubt, and in addition to that, we also learned that Google and Microsoft are now going to require age verification across the board.

The slope has become so slippery so quickly that it’s actually hard to keep track of. This Labor government is effectively normalizing ID checks for everyday internet use, which is exactly what the security state and the corporate sector across the world wants. We may soon see age and ID verification becoming a necessity for using a device at all in Australia.

It’s again not quite clear, but the ambiguity is actually part of the problem because we’re actually being kept in the dark over this. Is mandatory ID verification for general internet use what Australians really want? What are the other pathways which are also not being discussed?

This actually risks creating even more of a culture of self-censorship online. There’s so much happening in Australia in regards to the issue of internet policing that it’s actually getting very hard to keep track of. We’re now also discussing increasing online monitoring and algorithmic manipulation to keep track of hate speech online. Remember that one. This, of course, would also involve the commissioner’s office.

As in the UK, this is being played out at the moment. They are currently discovering that hate speech can be a very, very slippery slope and a very difficult concept. It’s not hard to see the chilling effect that this will have on freedom of speech as people feel an even greater need to censor themselves online than they already do. You only have to look at the example being set in the United Kingdom.

When are our lawmakers going to start considering the practical impact of these actions, not just agreeing with the stated intent? Do we really need age verification to use the internet when there are so many other options, or is this just more about funneling Australians into a digital ID system and gathering data from the millions who use Google, YouTube, and Microsoft every single day?

If all of this is just playing along outside the framework of parliamentary voting, then frankly, what is the point in having a parliament at all?

Online safety, of course, is a serious issue, and it’s one that we know merits a robust debate and discussion. We have to do what’s best for Australian children, but we should do that seeking to protect the privacy of Australians online, too. This heavy-handed approach, essentially done by stealth, is not doing that.

___

Image courtesy of Unsplash.