In Australia, as in the EU, we limit who can access online violence, s*xual violence, kiddy p*rn, b*stiality etc. Even in the ‘news’ and for entertainment. Which you might find surprising for a nation that freely peppers speech even in front of females and elders with ‘bloody’, the f-word and the c-word. Censorship? Try ‘rules of the game here’.
Thank you for posting the article. Just so we're clear: you are arguing against free speech and for government censorship. Is that right?
I found this link in your article. Here's an interesting quote:
In an exclusive interview with ABC Afternoon Briefing, Ms Inman-Grant argued the way the social media companies are structured meant content must be removed "globally", and Australia should have the right to issue those take downs.
Essentially, what you are arguing for is that any nation can censor and those censorship decrees would be applied globally. That will lead to the lowest common denominator as it pertains to free speech. On a global level. That is a radically authoritarian position IMO.
What Ms. Joanne "essentially" meant is what she wrote.
Instead of being rude, if you want to address the point about what is and isn't responsible actions on the part of a public forum, that would be more pertinent to the topic.
Also authoritarian and pro censorship. This entire thread and the hostility against Musk in general is due to the fact that he won't censor what the authorities, you and many here worship, want censored.
I’m sitting in the Fracture Clinic now, so don’t really have much time. Very glad for our health care system; just had telephone oncology consult while sitting here (2 hrs early).
Thank you for posting the article. Just so we're clear: you are arguing against free speech and for government censorship. Is that right?
I found this link in your article. Here's an interesting quote:
In an exclusive interview with ABC Afternoon Briefing, Ms Inman-Grant argued the way the social media companies are structured meant content must be removed "globally", and Australia should have the right to issue those take downs.
Essentially, what you are arguing for is that any nation can censor and those censorship decrees would be applied globally. That will lead to the lowest common denominator as it pertains to free speech. On a global level. That is a radically authoritarian position IMO.
free speech absolutism is the worst.
there are two choices -
1. fill the airwaves with every manner of crap available, and pretend they all have equal weight. 2. restrict the obvious b.s.and disinformation.
Both choices have problems. But 2 is the better solution, as long as you have a reasonably functioning democracy.
We are far closer to 1 than 2 at the moment. That's why we are f***ed.
So you don't think threatening harm to the families of judicial workers is an unusual and unkind means of getting one's way? Try to think about this for a while before responding or defending people I'm not even mentioning specifically.
Interesting that this recent Roy Morgan poll of the most distrusted brands in Australia included Meta, Tik Tok and X/Twitter:
News Corp has come in at No.5 in Roy Morgan’s survey of the 10 most distrusted brands in Australia
Miller, who is calling for the regulation of big tech companies, presented research that said seven out of 10 social media users “said they or someone they know had first-hand experience of negative issues on social media” andlisted all the problems that it had allegedly caused, from youth suicide to cyberbullying and revenge porn.
His claim appeared to be backed up by the latest Roy Morgan research on Australia’s 10 most distrusted brands(March 2024). While Facebook (Meta), X and TikTok were in the top 10, there was a media company in there too, and it was more distrusted than X or TikTok. You guessed it: News Corp came in at No. 5.
I thought of this thread after several attempts over about 15 minutes to get the graphic on this Tweet right, made possible by the new editing feature on X that gives you an hour to make changes. I haven't seen the text of this excellent resolution published elsewhere, something else that made me think of this thread
If you're looking for the actual text of the UN Security Council ceasefire resolution passed today, here is the provisional version that I believe is the final version. Source: @Raminhopic.twitter.com/PSslkppl01
I thought of this thread after several attempts over about 15 minutes to get the graphic on this Tweet right, made possible by the new editing feature on X that gives you an hour to make changes. I haven't seen the text of this excellent resolution published elsewhere, something else that made me think of this thread
why put this on a twitter thread though? Why not put on a more relevant thread or start a new topic. Or is this specific to X .
So you don't think threatening harm to the families of judicial workers is an unusual and unkind means of getting one's way? Try to think about this for a while before responding or defending people I'm not even mentioning specifically.
Who are you arguing with? Just because I don't agree with the dumbest authoritarian solution to a problem that means I'm all for that problem?
Who are you arguing with? Just because I don't agree with the dumbest authoritarian solution to a problem that means I'm all for that problem?
Who TF knows what you agree with? Last year you said you could vote for Ron DeSantis. Now you say you could vote for his former opponent. You're like a political Wacky Waving Inflatable Tube Guy for authoritarians. Keep waving those arms, terpboy, you're doing great and thanks to you, everyone wants to shop in your used car store.
In Australia, as in the EU, we limit who can access online violence, s*xual violence, kiddy p*rn, b*stiality etc. Even in the ‘news’ and for entertainment. Which you might find surprising for a nation that freely peppers speech even in front of females and elders with ‘bloody’, the f-word and the c-word.
Censorship? Try ‘rules of the game here’.