What next in Vegans’ information war against farmers?
Using tactics reminiscent of terrorists, vegan activists are relying on superior social media skills and custom technology to support their information warfare against farmers, writes Andre Oboler. So how do we tackle this?
Rendezview
Don't miss out on the headlines from Rendezview. Followed categories will be added to My News.
“State and territory governments should ensure that the full force of the law is brought against these green collar criminals.”
Those were the words of Prime Minister Scott Morrison in response to the vegan “day of action” earlier this week which saw co-ordinated protests in Queensland, NSW and Victoria involving chains, arrests and a whole lot of inconvenience for commuters.
While the protests that blocked Melbourne’s busiest intersection and those that “liberated” three lambs made headlines, this was just one element of a far larger campaign targeting farms.
RELATED OPINION: Bloody minded vegans deserve a roasting
Much of that campaign is technology-enabled. The day of protest itself, for example, was timed to mark the one-year anniversary of the release of a documentary, freely available online, which the activists are heavily promoting. An abattoir targeted in the day of action had featured in that documentary.
As an expert in the online elements of activism, extremism and cyber-warfare, and a lecturer in privacy, the actions of these vegan protesters raises a lot of questions for me. The first of those is how we frame what they are doing.
Their online campaign is advanced. Their language and visuals are extremely graphic and confronting. They are engaging in an information war against farmers, only two per cent of whom have both an online and social media presence, according to a 2018 Australian agriculture survey.
RELATED: Scott Morrison calls on farmers to sue animal activists
They’re not only using their superior social media skills to target farmers, but they have built custom technology and engaged in years of data gathering to support what looks very much like information warfare.
Less than three months ago, Aussie Farms — an animal rights charity — put the details and location of farmers, abattoirs and other agricultural facilities into a custom database linked to an interactive map built on top of technology from Google Maps.
Reminiscent of the “leaderless resistance” employed by terrorist groups, the site encouraged activists to upload additional images and video from any of the hundreds of targeted sites. The content the site invites will often require trespass and illegal surveillance. Farms were made sitting ducks overnight.
How has the government responded?
The government’s response has been loud, but the action has been limited.
Regulator after regulator looked at the problem and said there was nothing they could do.
The map is still online and no enforcement actions are listed against the charity behind it. The site is clearly linked to the trespass on farms.
Last Thursday, just days before the day of action, Aussie Farms uploaded hidden camera footage to their map of one of the sites that was subsequently targeted in the protests.
The Attorney-General and Minister for Agriculture announced Aussie Farms would be brought under the Privacy Act, excluding them for the Small Business exemption they previously enjoyed.
This won’t solve the problem. It’s not the privacy of individuals which is really at issue, but rather the adverse publicity created by an information war targeting farms.
Our Privacy Act is really a form of data protection law.
It protects information which is about a person who is identified or reasonably identifiable. Details about a business, the location of a farm, abattoir or other agricultural facility, and even graphic descriptions or videos of what occurs there, will not breach the Privacy Act.
So how do we tackle this?
If the people behind Aussie Farms are instigating and co-ordinating unlawful activity, that should be dealt with by police and the courts to an appropriate degree of seriousness.
If the issue is the propaganda presented on the map, some of it quite extreme and targeted at specific businesses, it is up to those businesses to take private legal action for defamation.
Given how many are affected, an action supported by industry bodies would not be a surprise.
The real issue is the map itself and the way it is being used to defame farmers, target specific localities for trespass and holding out an invitation for people to upload content they obtain through illegal activities.
That’s potentially easy to fix. The map runs off Google Maps. It is subject to Google’s terms of service which say a website using the service mustn’t “do anything inappropriate, illegal, or in violation of others’ rights (including their privacy, publicity, and intellectual property rights)”. If Google agrees there is breach, the entire map could vanish overnight and the remaining database data would be far less accessible and useful.
We need to strike the right balance between competing interests from freedom of speech to the reputations of people, companies and industries. We need to protect people’s safety while fostering innovative uses of technology. We need to respect the right to protest while holding those responsible for unlawful activities accountable.
Dr Andre Oboler is a senior lecturer in the La Trobe Law School and CEO of the Online Hate Prevention Institute.
Originally published as What next in Vegans’ information war against farmers?
We’re replacing the kangaroo with this? What a waste of $10m
What happens when you get a self-serving mining billionaire whose fortune depends on the Chinese Communist Party to help rebrand Australia? A national symbol that looks like a COVID-19 cell, writes Miranda Devine.
Sorry for the scare campaign, the planet is fine
When a climate activist apologised for how environmentalists had misled the public over climate change threats, the fearmongers were not happy, especially when Greta is upping her fight, writes Miranda Devine.