4 ms·

I honestly understand where the courts are coming from. If you can accept the fact that defamation laws are a valid limit on free speech (which Australians hav

I honestly understand where the courts are coming from. If you can accept the fact that defamation laws are a valid limit on free speech (which Australians have), then it follows that news organisations shouldn't be able to absolve themselves of all blame after posting inflammatory content, encouragng readers to "share their opinions" and failing to provide any sort of moderation whatsoever.

temp8964 5y ago
Of course, if they use comments to increase page views to profit, they should be responsible for moderating the comments.
SilverRed 5y ago
As long as all social media companies allow news orgs to turn off comments. I think this is a great law. News comments have long since been the most toxic pool of crap on the internet.
- hnthrow12997 5y ago
  Given that public gatherings are currently illegal in the majority of Australia and the government are passing draconian laws every week what do you think the average Australian who disagrees with them should do?
  - SilverRed 5y ago
    It is perfectly legal to disagree with them. You just can't say things already illegal and have been illegal for a very long time. Or publicly plan a mass illegal event. This law just specifies who is responsible for the laws being broken.
    - hnthrow12997 5y ago
      so you can disagree with them, just not online or in public or in private with anyone not in your household? Do you see any issues with this?
      - sellyme 5y ago
        > Do you see any issues with this? Yes, in that you're just ignoring the comment you replied to and repeating the same incorrect nonsense. Disagreeing with a law does not require breaking that law. You're perfectly welcome to disagree with the lockdowns in Victoria and NSW, and you can do that wherever you want. You're not welcome to break them.
      - totetsu 5y ago
        Its just like Carrie Lam says, People who break the law cannot expect to be considered part of civil society.
      - SilverRed 5y ago
        You can disagree with them though. Disagreeing is not limited to posting an event with a time and location which is illegal. There are many ways to disagree.
  - barbazoo 5y ago
    How would commenting on a news article allow you to communicate your disagreement to the people in charge? Contact your local representative for instance. Do people really think anyone other than equally angry people read anything they wrote in those comments?
  - gregoryl 5y ago
    what do you think the average Australian who disagrees with them should do This is clever wording. To make it clear: The average Australian does not disagree with the lock-downs.
    - anu7df 5y ago
      I think the "them" in the GP comment is draconian laws generally, not specifically the lock down.
    - hnthrow12997 5y ago
      https://www.startupdaily.net/2021/09/new-australian-surveillance-laws-give-police-powers-to-alter-facebook-and-twitter-posts/ https://www.startupdaily.net/2021/09/new-australian-surveill...
- Jerry2 5y ago
  >News comments have long since been the most toxic pool of crap on the internet. Looks to me like every other anti-free speech measure enacted in the last 5 years. Just remove comments so propaganda can't be countered by the people. Only the official proclamations can be allowed. Quite often, I find comments many times more insightful than the news stories themselves. Losing them limits the value of news sites to me. PS: You seem to hate comments and love limiting free speech yet here you are... commenting on news stories. Rules for thee, but not for me. How very hypocritical of you.
  - SilverRed 5y ago
    I don't hate comments. I disagree with unmoderated comment sections with no legal responsibility. On HN the comments are moderated and illegal content is removed. On FB news pages, it often is not.

temp8964 5y ago

Of course, if they use comments to increase page views to profit, they should be responsible for moderating the comments.

SilverRed 5y ago

As long as all social media companies allow news orgs to turn off comments. I think this is a great law. News comments have long since been the most toxic pool of crap on the internet.

hnthrow12997 5y ago
Given that public gatherings are currently illegal in the majority of Australia and the government are passing draconian laws every week what do you think the average Australian who disagrees with them should do?
- SilverRed 5y ago
  It is perfectly legal to disagree with them. You just can't say things already illegal and have been illegal for a very long time. Or publicly plan a mass illegal event. This law just specifies who is responsible for the laws being broken.
  - hnthrow12997 5y ago
    so you can disagree with them, just not online or in public or in private with anyone not in your household? Do you see any issues with this?
    - sellyme 5y ago
      > Do you see any issues with this? Yes, in that you're just ignoring the comment you replied to and repeating the same incorrect nonsense. Disagreeing with a law does not require breaking that law. You're perfectly welcome to disagree with the lockdowns in Victoria and NSW, and you can do that wherever you want. You're not welcome to break them.
    - totetsu 5y ago
      Its just like Carrie Lam says, People who break the law cannot expect to be considered part of civil society.
    - SilverRed 5y ago
      You can disagree with them though. Disagreeing is not limited to posting an event with a time and location which is illegal. There are many ways to disagree.
- barbazoo 5y ago
  How would commenting on a news article allow you to communicate your disagreement to the people in charge? Contact your local representative for instance. Do people really think anyone other than equally angry people read anything they wrote in those comments?
- gregoryl 5y ago
  what do you think the average Australian who disagrees with them should do This is clever wording. To make it clear: The average Australian does not disagree with the lock-downs.
  - anu7df 5y ago
    I think the "them" in the GP comment is draconian laws generally, not specifically the lock down.
  - hnthrow12997 5y ago
    https://www.startupdaily.net/2021/09/new-australian-surveillance-laws-give-police-powers-to-alter-facebook-and-twitter-posts/ https://www.startupdaily.net/2021/09/new-australian-surveill...
Jerry2 5y ago
>News comments have long since been the most toxic pool of crap on the internet. Looks to me like every other anti-free speech measure enacted in the last 5 years. Just remove comments so propaganda can't be countered by the people. Only the official proclamations can be allowed. Quite often, I find comments many times more insightful than the news stories themselves. Losing them limits the value of news sites to me. PS: You seem to hate comments and love limiting free speech yet here you are... commenting on news stories. Rules for thee, but not for me. How very hypocritical of you.
- SilverRed 5y ago
  I don't hate comments. I disagree with unmoderated comment sections with no legal responsibility. On HN the comments are moderated and illegal content is removed. On FB news pages, it often is not.