Chapter 9Committee view

9.1As noted by multiple contributors to this inquiry, a robust information ecosystem is critical to the health of Australia's democracy and to its ability to meet the challenges arising from climate change—including the need to transition to renewable energy sources.

9.2However, the committee heard that the integrity of Australia's information ecosystem is threatened by a proliferation of misinformation and disinformation (mis/disinformation), which is polarising public discourse and eroding trust in science and knowledge institutions.

9.3The motivations behind the spread of climate change mis/disinformation are also complex, ranging from genuine community concerns through to ideological, political and commercial narratives that can amplify or delay climate action, protect established business models, or increase community divisions. However, the committee heard that its spread can also be motivated simply by a desire to generate advertising revenue—through the creation of 'clickbait'[1] to increase online traffic.

9.4Worryingly, the committee heard that Australia has some of the highest levels of concern about information integrity globally. In addition, false and misleading information about climate change or the environment was one of the top misinformation topics encountered by Australian audiences, with levels of disinformation tending to spike around extreme weather events.

9.5The committee heard that digital platforms play a central role in the spread of mis/disinformation, with particular concerns raised in relation to the role of digital platform algorithms and recommender systems, as well as bots and bot networks in amplifying and spreading false and misleading information.

9.6In addition, submitters and witnesses told the committee that the widespread use of artificial intelligence (AI) had led to a self-perpetuating cycle of mis/disinformation in which AI uses existing mis/disinformation to create new content, which then becomes the basis for further AI-generated mis/disinformation—described during the inquiry as 'AI slopaganda'.

9.7While there was a strong focus on digital platforms during the inquiry, there was also widespread recognition that false and misleading information is also spread via mainstream media and in real-world interactions.

9.8The committee also heard concerns about the growing use of astroturfing as a mainstream tactic—where so-called 'grassroots' campaigns are in fact highly coordinated and well financed, often with links to think tanks, commercial/corporate interests, lobby groups, donors or political parties.

9.9In line with this, the committee also received evidence about the role of so-called 'dark money' in the promulgation of climate and energy related mis/disinformation—particularly in relation to the current lack of transparency around donations to think tanks and third-party affiliated organisations.

9.10Overall, the deteriorating information ecosystem has significant impacts on the Australian policy landscape, with climate mis/disinformation confusing public understanding of climate science, reducing support for action on climate change, and delaying renewable energy projects—with the associated economic opportunity costs, particularly for regional areas.

9.11More than one witness described how the proliferation of climate change mis/disinformation has succeeded in shifting the Overton Window—the acceptable window of discourse—to undermine the previous consensus around climate policy.

9.12Deteriorating information integrity also has significant local impacts on communities and individuals, with mis/disinformation campaigns related to renewable energy projects inflaming tensions and fuelling conflict. The committee heard concerning reports of bushfire survivors, landholders, and community group members alike being subject to harassment, intimidation, physical abuse, and even death threats.

9.13However, it is clear to the committee that there is no simple fix for the spread of false and misleading information. Indeed, more than one contributor to this inquiry described it as a 'wicked problem' with multiple actors and complex drivers and interests. This is even more so for mis/disinformation related to climate change and energy, which are themselves inherently complex and highly contested policy areas.

9.14The complex and multifaceted nature of climate mis/disinformation, and its wide ranging impacts led a number of inquiry participants to call for a systemic response—one that encompasses governments, knowledge institutions, and civil society.

9.15However, in designing any response, the committee urges the Australian Government to heed those stakeholders who have called for a nuanced approach that does not dismiss legitimate community concern or stifle public debate.

9.16Indeed, the committee recognises that silencing debate is likely to further undermine trust in communities, science, experts and public institutions, with implications for the nation's climate and energy policy, as well as the resilience and effectiveness of Australian democracy.

A coordinated approach to information integrity

9.17Evidence provided to the committee pointed to an increasing recognition of the need for systemic and coordinated approaches to effectively counter false and misleading information, with Australia's current piecemeal approach unlikely to deliver the reform needed to strengthen Australia's information ecosystem.

9.18Various participants urged the Australian Government to take a systemic approach to strengthening information integrity, with a desire for coordinated action between levels of government and across knowledge institutions and civil society more broadly.

9.19Accordingly, the committee supports a multifaceted approach to strengthening information integrity, with a strong focus on increasing transparency and elevating trusted local voices in regional communities.

9.20At the same time, the committee is cognisant of the need for any approach to be grounded in human rights law to ensure a balance between strong action and the protection of individual rights and freedoms.

9.21To this end, the committee agrees with the view expressed by some submitters that the boundaries between misinformation and disinformation are neither easy to determine, nor important. Rather, it is more important that individuals and communities have access to a diverse and healthy information ecosystem.

9.22Australia also needs to be active in global movements to enhance information integrity. Accordingly, the committee considers that Australia should be a signatory to the United Nations Global Principles on Information Integrity and coordinate implementation of these principles.

9.23The committee recommends the Australian Government support and adopt the United Nations Global Principles on Information Integrity and work to coordinate the application of these principles across government.

Joining global efforts

9.24There was significant support for Australia to join global efforts aimed at strengthening climate change information integrity. This would enable information and data sharing to help to curb the spread of misleading climate change narratives and build the evidence base around the effectiveness of measures to improve information integrity.

9.25For this reason, the committee supports calls for Australia to become a signatory to the Declaration on Information Integrity on Climate Change.

9.26The committee recommends the Australian Government officially endorse the Declaration on Information Integrity on Climate Change launched at COP30 in Belem, Brazil.

Building trust, resilience and transparency

9.27The committee heard broad support for a range of reforms to strengthen information integrity and address climate change and energy related mis/disinformation. These included actions to develop trusted, reliable sources of information, increase resilience through media, digital and science literacy, and improve information transparency and accountability.

Information transparency and accountability

9.28Improving information transparency and accountability were key themes of the inquiry. Substantial evidence received during the inquiry recommended improving information transparency and integrity to counteract false and misleading information about climate change and energy.

9.29Given the role of politics and politicians in the spread of climate change and energy mis/disinformation, the committee heard calls from across the spectrum of opinion for more transparent political donations, and information about lobbyists and vested interests.

9.30The committee recognises that multiple contributors have advocated for changes to funding declarations to improve transparency and provide insight into funding flows—both domestic and international. The committee suggests that this area deserves further exploration, especially in the lead up to a federal election.

9.31Further, the committee suggests there is a need for greater support for regulators, such as the Australian Securities and Investments Commission and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, to combat greenwashing.

9.32Lastly, the committee wishes to raise the issue of the use of AI to prepare submissions to government agencies and parliamentary inquiries—including this one. The committee suggests there could be value in developing a framework to guide submitters in relation to the use and disclosure of AI. In relation to submissions to energy project consultations, this could include thresholds for consideration of submissions based on location where appropriate (such as community-based versus outside views), with penalties for fraudulent work to discourage a mass of fraudulent submissions, including to parliamentary committees.

9.33The committee recommends the Australian Government ensure the adequacy of resourcing for regulators such as Australian Securities and Investments Commission and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission to combat and expose corporate greenwashing.

9.34The committee recommends the Australian Government explore ways to ensure greater transparency of campaign activities, such as the creation of third parties, that are resourced by commercial/corporate interests in the lead up to a federal election.

Trusted, reliable sources of information

9.35Multiple inquiry participants underscored the need for trusted and reliable sources of information to combat false and misleading information.

9.36However, the committee also recognises that levels of distrust in government institutions and scientists mean that finding sources of information that are considered unbiased and authoritative can be difficult.

9.37Therefore, the committee agrees with the view that a whole system approach is needed to ensure access to accurate and reliable information. This includes actions to ensure a strong media ecosystem (backed by fact checking services), and support for research into mis/disinformation related to climate change and renewable energy.

9.38In line with this, the committee heard multiple calls for action to support and strengthen public interest journalism, particularly at local levels where there has been an erosion in media diversity.

9.39The committee also supports stakeholders calls for better monitoring of mis/disinformation networks and more research into development of climate and energy misinformation and disinformation. This could include funding an independent public misinformation monitoring program as a cross-sector entity to monitor misinformation trends across platforms, using AI and social listening tools. This could be achieved by formalising a network of existing research capability. Being independent, it would be less vulnerable to future political influence.

9.40The committee recommends the Australian Government continue to provide funding support for regional and independent media outlets.

9.41The committee recommends the Australian Government increase funding for social sciences research relating to threats to climate and energy information integrity including potential solutions.

9.42The committee recommends the Australian Government explore funding models for independent monitoring support (for example, via the Australian Internet Observatory) to track hidden digital influence ecosystems and provide independent transparency and accountability of platforms.

Media, digital and science literacy

9.43Evidence presented to the inquiry emphasised the merit of science, media and digital literacy education, as well as development of critical thinking skills across the population, will help empower individuals to identify and respond to mis/disinformation and build democratic resilience.

9.44The committee urges the Australian Government to increase investment in targeted digital literacy programs, with a particular focus on helping individuals critically assess online information, understand algorithmic content curation, and identify misinformation and disinformation.

9.45The committee recommends the Australian Government, through the regular Education Ministers' Meeting curriculum review cycle, broaden the Australian Curriculum 'digital literacy' general capability to strengthen media literacy.

9.46The committee recommends the upcoming National Media Literacy Strategy incorporate the information integrity framework with examples from the climate and energy domain.

9.47The committee recommends the Australian Government, coordinated through the Education Ministers' Meeting, establish stronger oversight and disclosure requirements for corporate engagement within school systems, with clear policies regulating philanthropic or corporate relationships that may interfere with educational integrity.

The role of digital platforms

9.48The committee heard that the last decade has seen a rapid increase in the spread of false and misleading information, fuelled by the speed and reach of social media platforms and amplified by algorithms and recommender systems designed to maximise user engagement—often via the promotion of extreme or harmful content which can lead to psychosocial harm.

9.49The committee also heard concerns about a lack of action by digital platforms to prevent the spread and amplification of mis/disinformation on their platforms, despite repeated warnings and ample opportunities to respond.

9.50Participants made a range of recommendations in relation to improving Australian monitoring and regulation of dis/misinformation on digital platforms. This included suggestions for broad regulatory reforms to enhance accountability and transparency, as well as specific actions in relation to bots and inauthentic accounts, AI, and access to digital platform data for research purposes.

9.51There was also significant discussion about the approach that should be taken to any new regulation to ensure compliance with human rights and protect freedom of expression.

9.52There was a strong view that Australia's voluntary Code of Practice on Disinformation and Misinformation essentially allowed digital platforms to 'mark their own homework', leaving public interest subservient to the commercial imperatives of the digital platforms.

9.53There was also support for improving the quality of data reported to the Australian Communications and Media Authority by digital platforms, as well as support for enabling legitimate data access requests from researchers to be made easier. Meaningful access combined with adequate legal protection will help researchers and civic groups identify systemic threats and risks to the energy transition created by climate and energy misinformation and disinformation.

9.54There was also a significant focus on the impact of algorithms and recommender systems. The committee supports action such as that proposed by the Fix Our Feeds campaign, which would require social media platforms to offer an 'opt‑in' option for algorithms, giving users the ability to control whether or not their social media feed is algorithm driven.

9.55The committee recommends the Australian Government consider legislative or regulatory reform which identifies psychosocial harms, places the onus of responsibility in addressing these harms onto digital platforms and monitors effectiveness of their mitigations through regulatory and civic oversight.

9.56The committee recommends the Australian Government improve the quality of data reported to the Australian Communications and Media Authority from the digital platforms to include for example, thematic breakdown of their reporting inclusive of climate and energy data, denominator data, removal actions and paid advertising related to climate and energy.

9.57The committee recommends that the Australian Government consider how researchers could be provided adequate legal protection to undertake their work in the digital platform space.

9.58The committee recommends the Australian Government consider how to improve the complaints resolution process, including about false and misleading information online.

Renewable energy project planning and implementation processes

9.59One of the key themes emerging from the inquiry is the need to build trust and social licence in relation to both the energy transition as a whole and individual renewable energy projects.

9.60Currently, trust and social licence are being eroded by a failure to acknowledge and respond to genuine community concerns, as well as variable standards within the clean energy industry. Indeed, the committee heard that the majority of concerns dealt with by the Australian Energy Infrastructure Commissioner (AEIC) relate to community engagement and a lack of recognition of community concerns.

9.61In line with this, inquiry participants recommended a range of actions that could be taken to provide communities with timely access to accurate information about the energy transition and local energy projects. They also made a range of suggestions aimed at improving energy project planning and development processes, as well as approaches to community consultation and engagement.

9.62The committee acknowledges the frustration experienced by communities in the absence of trusted sources of information, effective consultation and engagement, and independent data and research about energy projects. Accordingly, the committee supports a strong focus on community engagement—including community-led engagement—to help build social licence for energy projects. In addition, the committee urges all agencies involved in the energy transition and renewable energy projects to strengthen their communication and social licence capabilities.

9.63The AEIC also told the committee of ongoing community concerns about the health impact of wind farms—despite the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) finding that there is no consistent evidence that wind farms directly impact human health. However, given the age of the NHMRC research, the committee supports the AEIC suggestion that it would be timely to provide updated information on this issue.

9.64The committee recommends the Australian Government ensure the Australian Energy Infrastructure Commissioner is adequately funded for community engagement.

9.65The committee recommends the Australian Government require the Australian Energy Infrastructure Commissioner to provide a summary of threats to climate and energy information integrity in their annual report.

9.66The committee recommends that the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation consider social licence on renewable energy projects. This could include:

hiring new staff with expertise in social science, behavioural science, and community engagement, and;

ensuring their decision making and advisory bodies have social licence expertise represented.

9.67The committee recommends that the Australian Government task the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation to provide advice on the costs and benefits of renewable energy creation, storage and transmission alongside clean manufacturing to create data needed to address local social licence concerns.

9.68The committee recommends the National Health and Medical Research Council fund new research on the effects of wind energy on human health.

9.69The committee recommends the Australian Government continue to strengthen communication and social licence capability across government agencies and departments. Improved information flow between jurisdictions and across departments will help address knowledge fragmentations across multiple sectors of the economy (e.g. transport, electricity, agriculture, emergency services).

9.70The committee recommends the Australian Government resource community led engagement driven by organisations with proven track records in local communities. These models may include capacity building for local leaders in rural and regional areas, support for local governments that are contingent on their engagement with community organisations or groups with a proven track record.

Footnotes

[1]Clickbait is online content (often a headline, image or story) designed to attract attention and encourage people to click on a hyperlink, which can lead to content of questionable value.