Banned or Fined: Social Media Platforms Should Face New Regulations

The logos of Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, and Snapchat on mobile devices in a combination of 2017–2022 photos. AP Photo

Social media platforms that refuse to comply with any government transparency requirements should be banned or face enforceable penalties, according to an Australian parliamentary inquiry into foreign interference through social media.

The report (pdf), which was released on Aug. 1 by the Senate Select Committee on Foreign Interference Through Social Media, recommends that the federal government implement a minimum set of transparency requirements that would be enforceable with fines. However, any platform which repeatedly fails to meet the transparency requirements could, as a last resort, be banned by the Minister for Home Affairs.

Additionally, they also recommended that if the United States government forces ByteDance, the parent company of TikTok to divest its stake in America, the federal government should consider following suit and ensure “TikTok Australia is also separated from its parent company as well.”

Chair of the Inquiry, Shadow Home Affairs Minister Senator James Paterson, told Sky News Australia on Aug. 2 that the recommendations from the senate inquiry tried to solve problems surrounding the platforms without outright bans. However, it was crucial that they were still on the table.

“We set out a series of recommendations that hopefully try to solve these problems without bans but crucially keep the bans on the table as a means of making sure that platforms comply, and as a last resort if they fail to comply so that the national security risk can be mitigated for all Australians,” Senator Paterson said.

The committee recommended 11 transparency standards that the government should impose on the platforms, including having a physical presence in Australia, disclosing foreign interference on their platforms, disclosure of directives given by foreign governments, and transparency on how their app and algorithms function.

“If they can’t meet those, then they would be fined; if they repeatedly failed to comply, then the minister of Home Affairs would have the power to ban them entirely,” Senator Paterson said.

WeChat, TikTok Put on Notice

Paterson also put Chinese social media apps WeChat and Tiktok on notice, saying that they must understand there will be real-world consequences of failing to work with the federal government on the issue of foreign interference.

“These platforms, WeChat, TikTok, doesn’t matter who they are if they are headquartered in authoritarian states. They’ve demonstrated contempt for the Parliament of Australia, for our regulators and for our laws,” Senator Paterson said.

Senator James Paterson in the senate. Screenshot/The Epoch Times

“Effectively, they feel that they don’t need to participate in an inquiry like this. Or if they do participate, they can do so in a way that’s completely insincere and nongenuine because they don’t think there are going to be any consequences. They have to understand that will be real consequences to improve their behaviour.”

The comments from Paterson come after WeChat failed to answer 53 questions from the inquiry after it was criticised for failing to attend the inquiry despite personal invitations from the senator. The questions included topics such as its ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), whether it censors content critical of the CCP, if it promotes CCP propaganda, and if the app is used to “surveil and target Australian users critical of the regime.”

The company was also asked about its data storage locations, connection to state-owned media outlets, and how many registered users it currently has on both Weixin and WeChat in Australia.

WeChat and TikTok Argue Their Safe

Both TikTok and WeChat have argued their platforms are safe, with WeChat, in a previous submission to the inquiry (pdf), saying that it provides a safe and secure user experience.

“WeChat’s policy is to ensure that content and behaviour on its application is authentic and to remove false news, disinformation, misinformation, false advertising, and any other content that may be otherwise unsafe or objectionable (such as violent, criminal, illegal or inappropriate content). It does this by setting and enforcing acceptable use standards,” the company stated.

Additionally, they claim that their Acceptable Use Policy “specifically and expressly” forbids promotional political content where a person or entity has paid for such content or the relevant promotional political content does not comply with any applicable laws or regulations.

Meanwhile, TikTok’s Australia General Manager Lee Hunter has also denied there is any issue with the app, telling The Epoch Times previously in an email that there is no evidence to suggest TikTok is a security risk.

“We stress that there is no evidence to suggest that TikTok is in any way a security risk to Australians and should not be treated differently to other social media platforms,” Mr. Hunter said.

“Our millions of Australian users deserve a government which makes decisions based upon facts and who treats all businesses fairly, regardless of country of origin.”