Media union pans Labor’s proposed misinformation bill

The journalists’ union has criticised Labor’s proposed laws to combat online misinformation and disinformation for its broad definition of harm.

Communications Minister Michelle Rowland. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Martin Ollman

The journalists’ union has criticised Labor’s proposed laws to combat online misinformation and disinformation for its broad definition of harm, which it warns could be “dangerous and open to misuse and exploitation”.

The Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance has raised concerns about the draft bill which will grant the Australian Communications and Media Authority heightened powers to fine social media giants millions of dollars for misinformation and content it deems “harmful”.

The left-wing union joins an unlikely group of critics, which includes Coalition MPs and social media giants, who have opposed the bill in its current form over concerns it will have a chilling effect on freedom of speech.

“MEAA believes the inclusion of this ‘harm’ is dangerous and open to misuse and exploitation,” the submission says. “Indeed, there is a long history of important social movements being considered ‘disruptive’ by governments and powerful interests.”

The legislation was unveiled by Communications Minister Michelle Rowland in June as part of Labor’s push to rein in online misinformation and disinformation which poses a threat to the safety and wellbeing of Australians. The draft bill, which will see social media providers continue to moderate online content, will empower ACMA to seek information from the platforms about measures they have in place to address misinformation and disinformation, and develop an industry-wide standard, if self-regulation fails.

Content produced by mainstream media outlets, education providers or authorised by governments will not fall under the jurisdiction of the bill, with the MEAA labelling governments’ exception as concerning.

“MEAA believes the exclusion of content produced by federal, state, territory or local governments is concerning,” the submission says.

“It is simply unreasonable that the view of governments be protected from the reach of this bill’s definition of ‘misinformation’ and paves the way for government to politicise valid criticisms of it while engaging in misinformation of its own.

“It is also unclear why the code and standard-making powers will not apply to authorised electoral and referendum content. Disinformation and misinformation in these forms of information has the capacity to contribute to the undermining of our democratic institutions.”

The MEAA acknowledged the importance of combating the “very real” threat of online misinformation.