Australia Threatens Social Media Laws That Could Jail Tech Execs (cnet.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNET: Following the livestreamed New Zealand mosque shooting that left 50 dead in Christchurch, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison is looking to crack down on extremist content on social media. Morrison will on Tuesday meet with Australian executives of Facebook, Twitter and Google to discuss extremist content legislation that would punish these companies' executives with jail time, the Australian Financial Review reports. Local internet service providers will also be present at the meeting.

Details of the proposed legislation aren't yet known. However, Europe's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which applies to any company operating in the continent, showed that tech companies can change their global practices to appease local legislation. News of Morrison's meeting with tech executives comes on the same day that his government announced increased punishment for companies misusing user information. Maximum penalties for misuse of private data was raised from AU$2.1 million to AU$10 million -- or 10 percent of the company's domestic revenue, or three times the value gained from that misuse of data.

Comments

Re:Anybody remember freedom of speech?

[xpiotr]

Isn't it more the consequences of once free speech.
If you host a site that encourages people to kill other people, be ready to take to the consequences of this.

Statements of fact

[Okian Warrior]

Isn't it more the consequences of once free speech.

If you host a site that encourages people to kill other people, be ready to take to the consequences of this.

I viewed the video, and it's not that bad. It's a live-action game of "doom" using real people.

My point is that the media adjectives and adverbs do not correctly describe the visceral impact of the video. Yes, people are killed. No, it's not "horrifying", "gut wrenching", "sickening", or any of the choice descriptions we see from the MSM outlets. It's about as bad as any active-duty military person has seen in real life, and any military person should be able to watch the video with a critical eye and note details that might be relevant to an investigation or court trial. (A lot of police could, also.)

This came up when someone online made a statement of fact about the video that seemed a bit... unlikely, so I went to check for myself(*).

While searching for the video online I noted that CNN was, at that very moment, pushing the hoax that Trump said Nazis were "fine people", which can be quickly dis-verified because Trump's statements are available online.

CNN probably considers Trumps words as racist and, if he weren't the president, could get his comments removed from the internet on that basis. A lot of people could simply report those words as racist speech, and the internet giants would dutifully remove those posts.

And we would have no source of information except the MSM version of what he said.

The only reason this doesn't happen to Trump is because he's a high-profile celebrity, but anyone else can be subject to misinformation, spin, and outright hoax. Like the Covington students being racist, Brett Kavanaugh being a serial rapist, and Trayvon Martin - that adorable teen-aged child - gunned down by a racist white man.

The video should be available for anyone to view online, the manifesto as well, because if it isn't we will have to rely on the judgement of experts in the MSM for content and significance.

And the judgement of experts in the MSM is untrustworthy(**).

(*) Yes, apparently the killer was listening to polka music (or similar) on his way to the mosque.

(**) The MSM is trying to paint the shooter as a right-wing zealot based on the manifesto, but do the actual manifesto words support that conclusion? New Zealand wants to ban the manifesto from the internet.