Coalition Members' dissenting report

Executive Summary

1.1This dissenting report addresses the Coalition committee members' view of the Second interim report: digital platforms and the traditional news media (Second Interim Report) of the Joint Select Committee on Social Media and Australian Society.

1.2Over the past four months, the committee has heard harrowing testimony from parents, mental health groups, young people, educators, technology experts, analysts and researchers, our security agencies, as well as psychologists and brain-science experts. We share a grave concern for what young people see online, and equally, the freedom the online world provides for people to say and treat one another as they would not ordinarily do in a face-to-face environment. The impact of the societal harms caused to the community by social media will be a greater focus in the committee's final report.

1.3The committee has also heard from traditional and digital media sources, about the impact of the social media platforms on their business models, both at the establishment and growth phases, and how a lack of algorithmic transparency leaves the success or failure of these sites, and their messages, to the whim of the platform engineers.

1.4Coalition committee members share many of the concerns outlined in the Second Interim Report's analysis. However, we highlight the fact that the Albanese Government has failed to take any firm action to resolve the dispute with Meta under the News Media Bargaining Code which was introduced by the former Coalition Government which according to some reports, has seen hundreds of millions of dollars paid to Australian media companies.[1]

1.5Coalition committee members also reject the Government's plans to introduce its Misinformation Bill which will serve only to silence some voices, and not others.

Transparency Obligations

1.6In the scope of the Second Interim Report, Coalition committee members acknowledge and accept arguments to support more, and broader, algorithmic transparency obligations.

1.7Coalition committee members have heard consistent and compelling evidence around a lack of transparency relating to any social media or online platform algorithms, and a regulatory framework which is no longer fit for purpose given the vast expansion in algorithmically governed platforms, which now dominate as much as eight hours of young Australians' days, every day.[2]

1.8It is the hope of Coalition committee members that this matter will be further considered, and the subject of specific recommendations, in the final report.

Impact of Social Media on News Media: News Media Bargaining Code and Media Content Primacy

1.9One significant theme in the Second Interim Report's recommendations and analysis was the efficacy of the News Media Bargaining Code.

1.10The report recommendations on this topic are based on the claim that the News Media Bargaining Code is now no longer fit for purpose. The Coalition committee members strongly reject this assertion.

1.11The Code commenced in March 2021 under the former Coalition Government, following the passage through the Parliament of the Treasury Laws Amendment (News Media and Digital Platforms Mandatory Bargaining Code) Act 2021. The Second Interim Report highlights that the Department of the Treasury published a report reviewing the Code in November 2022:

In November 2022, the Department of the Treasury published the report of its review of the Code. The review considered it 'reasonable to conclude that the Bargaining Code has been a success to date'. It also noted that over '30 commercial agreements had been struck, agreements that were highly unlikely to have been made without the Bargaining Code'.[3]

1.12The News Media Bargaining Code was designed to give government powerful tools to hold social media companies to account for the commercial benefits they gain from use of Australian news content. The Coalition Government's premise was that Australian news media organisations should be compensated for the use of the content by social media platforms. This was clearly in both the public interest and in the interests of the Australian media industry.

1.13The Albanese Government has been weak in its handling of this issue. It has failed to take action available to it under the powers set out in the Code and has instead attempted to cite referral of the issue to this committee as some form of action. In reality, the Government has simply used this referral to obfuscate and delay.

1.14The current Australian Government has failed to deliver on its promise to exercise its powers under the Code. Back in March this year, the Assistant Treasurer, The Hon Stephen Jones MP, promised that:

The Government will be taking all of the steps available to it under the News Media Bargaining Code from the Prime Minister to every Minister in his Government.[4]

1.15However, that has not happened. Representatives of Meta gave evidence to this committee on 4 September 2024 that the only Minister with whom Meta had met with was Mr Jones, and that was with the company's policy manager for the Asia Pacific region. The level of seniority of these discussions is a far cry from the high-level discussions held between the former Australian Treasurer, The Hon Josh Frydenberg, and the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Meta, Mr Mark Zuckerberg, in 2021.

1.16This Government has lacked the necessary courage to use the strong powers available to it under the Code. By contrast, the Coalition Government applied the Code in 2021 to ensure substantial financial agreements were reached between Australian media, and providers like Meta and Google. The Albanese Government has been incapable of repeating that success and is now seeking to blame the Code for its own failings and inaction.

1.17The future of Australian journalism and the very fabric of Australian democracy is at stake due to the weak leadership of the Albanese Government. Under the Coalition, Meta paid for news. Under this Albanese Government, Meta has demonstrated its utter contempt for the Australian Government, its people and its laws – and has gotten away with it.

Misinformation and Disinformation Legislation: the Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024

1.18Coalition committee members reject this recommendation. Whilst Recommendation 8 of the Second Interim Report does not expressly call on Parliament to pass the Misinformation Bill, the intent of the recommendation is clear. The attempt to use the report's recommendations to justify the Government's Misinformation Bill is a political stunt on what represents an appalling attack on free speech.

1.19The Misinformation Bill is the subject of a Senate inquiry which is due to report by 25 November 2024. Committee hearings only recently commenced and only a fraction of the many thousands of submissions on the bill have actually been made public.

1.20In fact, the Misinformation Bill was only referred to the Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications on 19 September 2024.

1.21This comes after a staggeringly short consultation period of just seven working days.

1.22The Misinformation Bill is currently being debated in the House of Representatives. The Communications Minister has confirmed that she seeks to pass the bill this year, limiting time for its proper scrutiny.

1.23This controversial bill has not been subjected to an adequate and comprehensive parliamentary review.

1.24At no time was the Misinformation Bill formally considered by this committee as evidence. Nor is the formal consideration of this bill text part of the Terms of Reference for this committee.

1.25The bill risks censorship of everyday Australians, due to ill-defined terms such as 'misinformation' and 'disinformation'. It betrays our democracy by incentivising censorship and will make government the arbiter of truth.

1.26The bill would impose huge fines on digital platforms, if the Government decides that the platforms have not censored enough of what the Government considers to be misinformation.

1.27Under the Government's plan, academics, scientists, and artists are exempted from the bill as being incapable of being a source of misinformation or disinformation—but not everyday Australians.

1.28The definitions of misinformation and disinformation are flawed, and the application of contexts in which an opinion can be classified as misinformation is unclear.

1.29The Coalition is concerned that to avoid liability for these fines, digital platforms will err on the side of caution and censor legal, respectful free speech of everyday Australian users. Coalition committee members consider that this will have a chilling effect on democracy in this country. Evidence for key groups to the Senate inquiry on this bill support this position.

1.30More concerning, under the current bill before the Parliament, the Communications Minister can personally order misinformation investigations and hearings, on terms of her choosing.

1.31The Coalition will not be supporting the Misinformation Bill in the Parliament, and accordingly, the Coalition committee members will not be supporting any recommendations made by this Second Interim Report that convey or imply approval of the bill.

1.32Coalition committee members appreciate that a robust and independent media industry, holding digital platforms accountable, and increasing the public's digital and media literacy are important factors to consider in combatting the proliferation of misinformation and disinformation.

1.33The Coalition would like to note that the committee heard strong evidence around the importance of media literacy as an avenue to combat misinformation and disinformation through appropriate media literacy education through Australia's schooling system. This evidence has not been given the same credence in the Second Interim Report as Labor's own flawed Misinformation Bill has.

Acknowledgments and Reflections

1.34We thank the committee Chair, Ms Sharon Claydon MP, and committee members for conducting a comprehensive inquiry on a matter of national significance in a collegiate manner.

1.35The Coalition also thank the secretariat in their work to date facilitating a broad reaching evidence base.

1.36The Coalition thinks that the impact of social media on Australian society is an issue of national significance and looks forward to continuing to work with committee colleagues in a bipartisan spirit, where possible on this issue.

Footnotes

[1]Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance, Submission 53, p. 5; Private Media, Submission 56, p. 1; Per Capita, Submission 50, p. 3; The Daily Aus, Submission 43, p. 4; Capital Brief, Submission 64, p. 3.

[2]Australian Gaming and Screens Alliance, Submission 59, p. 8.

[3]Joint Select Committee on Social Media and Australian Society, Second interim report: digital platforms and the traditional news media, October 2024, p. 17.

[4]The Hon Stephen Jones MP, Assistant Treasurer, Meta's News Content Announcement Press Conference, 1 March 2024.