Religious Leaders Raise Concerns With Australian ‘Misinformation and Disinformation’ Law

The X logo on a smartphone screen in Los Angeles, Calif., on July 31, 2023. Chris Delmas/AFP via Getty Images

Multiple Australian faith leaders have raised significant concerns about the Federal government’s proposed misinformation and disinformation legislation.

The proposed law grants broad powers to the government agency the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), to enforce compliance from digital platforms with standards on content shared online.

The Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2024 (pdf) is back on the agenda for debate in Parliament this week.

Under the bill, misinformation and disinformation are defined as content that is “reasonably verifiable as false, misleading, or deceptive” and “reasonably likely to cause or contribute to serious harm.”

The legislation provides exemptions for some types of content, such as news and content shared for academic, artistic, scientific, or religious purposes is exempt.

However, despite this exclusion, religious groups still raised concerns with the bill in submissions to a Senate committee inquiry.

In a combined submission, faith leaders from the Anglican Church of Australia (Sydney Diocese), Shia Muslim Council of Australia, Australian Baptist Ministries, Presbyterian Church of Australia, Seventh Day Adventist Church of Australia, Hillsong Australia, NSW Council of Churches, and the Christian Schools Association raised major concerns with the bill.

“We have significant concerns about the overall effect of the Bill on the free dissemination of ideas in the public sphere—in particular, religious speech and debate,” the submission said (pdf).

“The Bill places significant constraints on digital communications platform providers and incentivises them to over-censor content on the possibility that it might be “harmful.”

The religious leaders also argued that the Bill’s definitions of misinformation and disinformation were so broad they could potentially restrict the “legitimate, good faith expression of religious, moral, and political opinions.

Further, the submission raised concerns the protections for legitimate religious speech are contingent on a series of “reasonableness” tests applied by platform providers.

“Providers will err on the side of caution when assessing contentious content, because of the threat of financial sanction,” the submission stated.

“This reasonableness standard falls far below Australia’s obligations under international human rights instruments.”

The submission also warned that the bill would create a “two-tier approach” to religious expression.

“The overall effect of the bill on religious speech means that there will effectively be a two-tier approach to religious expression rights under Australian law, with much more stringent controls and less freedom on digital platforms constrained by this Bill, than there are on non-digital communications covered by other law,” it stated.

Sydney Church Stabbing Site Opposes Political Censorship Agenda

Meanwhile, Christ the Good Shepherd Church also wrote a submission, signed by Father Daniel, opposing the passing of the Misinformation and Disinformation Bill.

This comes after Assyrian Christian Leader Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel was stabbed during a live-streamed sermon at this church in Sydney’s western suburbs on April 15, 2024.

This church condemned the use of this stabbing incident to push a political censorship agenda.

“It is unfortunate that such events are exploited for political gain. As a religious institution, we believe in transparency and truth. The attempt to manipulate public discourse by using this incident is deeply troubling on the state of politics in Australia,” the submission said (pdf).

The church rejected any misinformation or online censorship bill proposed by the government, adding “Our faith teaches us to seek truth, and censorship should not be the solution.”

Catholic Bishops Conference Concerned About Free Speech

Further, the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference raised concerns the committee had allowed only one week for the preparation of submissions.

In addition, they noted the Bill leaves open the question of what is considered “reasonable” and whether religious purpose extends beyond religious institutions to Australians practicing or sharing their faith.

“The Bill is a significant improvement on the exposure draft but leaves open the question of what is considered ’reasonable‘ and whether a ’religious purpose’ extends beyond religious institutions to Australians practicing or sharing their religious faith,” the submission stated.

“The conference is grateful that religious purpose is included in the definition of excluded dissemination but is concerned about how this provision will be interpreted and about the potential of the bill to unreasonably limit free speech (pdf).”

The Australian Christian Lobby said the bill was “flawed in principle as to damage Australian society, and the functioning of Australian democracy.”

“The Bill violated freedom of expression,” the submission said (pdf).

“The definitions of misinformation and harm are too broad; the exemptions are inadequate and unworkable.”

Uniting Church Victoria and Tasmania Express Support

On the other hand, the Uniting Church in Australia Synod of Victoria and Tasmania expressed support for the proposed law.

“Given the psychological effects of the online world on human behaviour, the spread of seriously harmful misinformation and disinformation seems more likely than in the real world,” the submission said (pdf).

“Thus, greater regulation of misinformation and disinformation in the online world is justified.”

Communications Minister Michelle Rowland said the government is committed to keeping Australians safe online.

“Misinformation and disinformation pose a serious threat to the safety and wellbeing of Australians, as well as to our democracy, society, and economy,” she said at the time of bringing the legislation to parliament in September.

“Doing nothing and allowing this problem to fester is not an option.”