Brownstone Institute
Musk Wins Latest Censorship Battle in Australia
US billionaire Elon Musk, Australian eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant
From the Brownstone Institute
BY
Can Australia’s eSafety Commissioner block content globally on demand? Not today, ruled the Australian Federal Court, in a win for Elon Musk’s social media platform X.
In a decision on Monday, Justice Geoffrey Kennett refused to extend a temporary injunction obtained by eSafety last month, which forced X to remove footage of the Wakeley church stabbing, an alleged religiously motivated terror attack.
Under the Online Safety Act (2021), the eSafety Commissioner, Julie Inman Grant, has the authority to order removal of such ‘class 1 material’ within Australia under threat of hefty fines.
eSafety argued that X had not gone far enough to block the content from Australians, as a geo-block can be circumvented by a VPN. X argued that eSafety was effectively seeking a global ban on content, straying outside of the Australian online harm regulator’s jurisdiction.
eSafety applied to the Federal Court to extend its temporary injunction against X, with a hearing taking place on Friday 10 May. The temporary injunction was due to expire at 5pm on Friday, but was extended to 5pm Monday—to allow time for Justice Kennett to deliver a decision on the matter.
In his decision, Justice Kennett held that X had taken “reasonable” steps to block the stabbing content as required under Australian law, and that eSafety’s request for a global ban was not reasonable.
Therefore, “The orders of the court will be that the application to extend…is refused,” said Justice Kennett, meaning that as of 5pm Monday, the injunction is no longer effective.
In a statement on the Federal Court decision, eSafety said that the matter will return to Court for a case management hearing on Wednesday, 15 May.
“The application for this injunction should have never been brought,” said Dr Reuben Kirkham, Co-Director of the Free Speech Union of Australia (FSU) in a statement, questioning the validity of the Commissioner’s bid to enact a global content ban on X. “The eSafety Commissioner is overreaching and behaving more like an activist than a responsible public servant.”
Dr Kirkham, who was present for the hearing, told Dystopian Down Under that he counted 12 lawyers present (seven for X, five for eSafety), which, if eSafety is ordered to pay costs, will lump taxpayers with “a considerable amount of unnecessary legal costs.”
Digital civil liberties nonprofit the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) echoes FSU Australia’s position, stating that, “no single country should be able to restrict speech across the entire internet,” and likening the Commissioner’s actions to “[using] a sledgehammer to crack a nut.”
An affidavit submitted by the EFF to the eSafety vs. X proceedings called for the Court to consider the international impact that a ruling in eSafety’s favour would have in setting a precedent for allowing one country to enforce content bans on citizens of other countries.
“If one court can impose speech-restrictive rules on the entire Internet—despite direct conflicts with laws [in] a foreign jurisdiction as well as international human rights principles—the norms of expectations of all internet users are at risk,” stated the EFF in an article summarizing the affidavit.
X’s Global Government Affairs posted about the hearing, stating, “We’re glad X is fighting back, and we hope the judge will recognize the eSafety regulator’s demand for what it is—a big step toward unchecked global censorship—and refuse to let Australia set another dangerous precedent.” At the time of publishing, no updated statement on the Judge’s decision had been issued.
Dr Kirkham calls the Commissioner’s application to extend her injunction against X “part of a pattern where the eSafety Commissioner’s office seemingly engages in gamesmanship rather than respecting the rule of law or acting as a model litigant.”
Indeed, the ruling in X’s favour comes amidst mounting controversy over the eSafety Commissioner’s ongoing battle with X, which appears to be driven partly by Julie Inman Grant’s global censorship ambitions, and partly by personal feelings.
Inman Grant, who formerly directed Twitter’s Public Policy (Australia and Southeast Asia), has repeatedly criticized Elon Musk since his purchase of the Twitter platform in 2022.
Moreover, Musk’s advocacy for a broad interpretation of free speech on the internet conflicts with Inman Grant’s professed view of free speech as a right that needs to be “recalibrated” for online spaces.
Perhaps the biggest controversy between X and eSafety centres on the highly charged and subective issue of gender ideology.
Inman Grant has enforced the removal of a string of posts on X questioning gender ideology, including one suggesting that men can’t breastfeed, and another about a trans-identified male who allegedly injured female players during a women’s football game in NSW.
In an internationally high-profile case, the Commissioner recently issued a removal notice over an acerbic gender-critical post by Canadian activist Billboard Chris, raising questions over whether the Government should be able to police opinions and censor statements of biological fact on the internet.
FSU Australia is currently involved in Administrative Appeal Tribunal proceedings on behalf of Billboard Chris (real name Chris Elston) against the eSafety Commissioner. Additionally, X has threatened to sue eSafety over the matter.
Returning to the issue of the Wakeley stabbing footage, Inman Grant’s attempt to globally ban the content has been supported by the Australian Government, which leveraged the incident to call for more censorship, including the reintroduction of an unpopular misinformation bill.
Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has also responded to calls to address violence against women by proposing to further expand eSafety’s budget and remit, which could see deep fake pornography and “other misogynistic material” censored by the regulator.
No one will argue against explicit pornography being blocked from children’s view, but it is around the grey edges of definition creep on terms like ‘harm,’ ‘adult cyber abuse,’ and ‘misogynistic material’ where disagreements will undoubtedly kick off.
In a move of ‘no confidence’ against eSafety, FSU Australia has launched a petition to abolish the office of the eSafety Commissioner altogether, arguing that a combination of parental controls and platform incentives will suffice in keeping children safe on the internet.
A more moderate approach may be to curtail eSafety’s remit to its original function of dealing with child abuse content (as in 2015), and revenge porn (as in 2017), before the regulator’s purview and powers were significantly expanded with the introduction of the Online Safety Act in 2021.
However, in the media and political conversation, there is little appetite for a moderate approach, as conveyed in a viral guest appearance by media personality Tracey Holmes on a recent episode of the ABC’s failing show Q+A.
Calling out the double standard in the censorship conversation, Holmes told the studio audience,
“I don’t agree with any kind of censorship in a general sense. I don’t think Elon Musk is contributing to any social cohesion split inside this country. I think our mainstream media is doing enough of that. I think our politicians do enough of that…
“Of course there are fault lines everywhere, but there’s only one way you can stop those fault lines from getting bigger, and that is to have the ability to have the town square to hear different points of view…
“And I think unfortunately we’ve been fed ‘this side or that side’ for so long, people are giving up on mainstream media, that’s why they’re tuning out. That’s why they’re going to YouTube…we have let them down.”
Hopefully, some higher-ups in the corporate media tuned in to hear what Holmes had to say.
Read more about the judge’s decision
Republished from the author’s Substack
Brownstone Institute
Cut the Truth Out of Our Heads
From the Brownstone Institute
By
The old meme of the man staying up late typing because “someone is wrong on the Internet” applies now to an entire swath of the ruling class. They want freedom out and the stakeholders in control
The censors are losing patience. They have gone from regretting the existence of free speech and gaming the system as best they can to fantasizing about ending it through criminal penalties.
You can observe this change in temperament – from frustration to fury to calling for violent solutions – over the last several weeks. And it serves as a reminder: censorship was never the end point. It was always about controlling society’s “cognitive infrastructure,” which is how we think. And to what end? A secure monopoly on political power.
This week, Fox reporter Peter Doocy was sparring with the White House spokesperson over whether FEMA is funding migrants even as it cannot help American storm survivors. She immediately shot back and called this “disinformation.” Peter wanted to know what part of his question qualified. Jean-Pierre said it was the whole context of the question and otherwise never said.
It was clear to anyone who was watching that the term “disinformation” means to her nothing other than a premise or fact that is unwelcome and needs to be shut down. This messaging has been further reinforced by a Harris/Walz ad blaming unnamed “misinformation” from Trump for exacerbating hurricane suffering following Hurricane Helene.
This exchange came only days after Hillary Clinton suggested criminal penalties for disinformation, else “they will lose total control.” It’s an odd plural pronoun because, presumably, she is not in control..unless she regards herself as a proxy for an entire class of rulers.
Meanwhile, former presidential candidate John Kerry said the existence of free speech is making government impossible. Kamala Harris herself has sworn to “hold social media accountable” for the “hate infiltrating their platforms.” And well-connected physician Peter Hotez is calling for Homeland Security and NATO to put an end to debates over vaccines
You can detect the fury in all their voices, almost as if every post on X or video on Rumble is causing them to lose their minds, to the point that they are just saying it out loud: “Make them stop.”
Hurricane Milton seems to have caused the censors to flip out in a violent rage, as people wondered whether and to what extent the government might have something to do with manipulating the weather for political reasons. A writer in the Atlantic explodes: “I’m running out of ways to explain how bad this is. What’s happening in America today is something darker than a misinformation crisis,” while decrying “outright conspiracy theorizing and utter nonsense racking up millions of views across the internet.”
Catch that? It’s the viewing itself that is the problem, as if people do not have the capacity to think for themselves.
The old meme of the man staying up late typing because “someone is wrong on the Internet” applies now to an entire swath of the ruling class. They want freedom out and the stakeholders in control, somehow forcing the whole of the digital age into a version of 1970s television with three channels and 1-800 numbers. The Biden administration even refounded the Internet, replacing the Declaration of Freedom with a new Declaration of the Future.
YouTube accounts have been demonetized and deleted. Facebook posts have been throttled and banned. LinkedIn’s algorithms punish posts that take issue with regime narratives. This has not slowed down in light of litigation but rather continued and intensified.
The goal is to close up the Internet. They would have done it by now if it were not for the First Amendment, which stands in their way. For now, they will continue to work through university cutouts, third-party providers, phony baloney fact-checkers, pressure on tech firms that provide government services at a price, and other mechanisms to achieve indirectly what they cannot do directly just yet.
Among the strategies is the political persecution of dissenters. Alex Jones is a bellwether here and his company is being bankrupted. Steve Bannon, the philosopher king of MAGA, has been in jail for the entire election season for having defied a Congressional subpoena on the advice of counsel. The protestors on January 6 have been in prison not for damages caused or trespassing but for landing on the wrong side of the regime.
Most of us had an intuition that the Covid vaccine mandates themselves were not entirely about health but rather a tactic of exclusion of those who were not fully trusting of authority. This was rather obvious when it came to the military and the medical profession but less apparent within academia where noncompliant students and professors were effectively purged for their refusal to risk their lives for pharma.
There was an element of malice, too, in the mask mandates. Even though there was zero scientific evidence that a Chinese-made synthetic cloth worn on the face can change epidemiological dynamics, they did serve well as a visible sign to separate believers from unbelievers, and also as a sadistic means of reminding individualists of who is really running the show.
The final means of censorship is violence against person and property, while the end is to control what you think in service of one-party rule. Major tech companies and major media are wholly complicit in bringing this about. Only a handful of services are stopping this and they are all being targeted by the regime through myriad forms of lawfare.
Postscript: as this article is released, the website archive.org has been fully down for the better part of a week, supposedly due to a catastrophic DDOS attack. The private owners say the data has been saved and it will be restored in time. Maybe. But consider: this the one tool we have for having a verified memory of what was posted when. It is how we found that WHO changed its definition of herd immunity. It’s how we found that the CDC was behind the mail-in ballot fiasco of 2020. It’s how we know that FTX funded anti-Ivermectin studies. And so on. The links were stable and good, never down.
Until now, two weeks before the election. We are of course supposed to believe that this shocking collapse is purely a coincidence. Maybe. Probably. And yet without this website – a central point of failure – vast amounts of the history of the last quarter century is deleted. The entire contents of the web can be re-written as vaporware, here one instant, gone the next. Even if this site does come back, what will be missing and how long will it take to figure it out? Will the Internet have been lobotomized? If not this time, could it happen in the future? Certainly.
Brownstone Institute
China Enters the Economic Doom-Loop
From the Brownstone Institute
By
China is going pear-shaped as Beijing panics and wheels out the “monetary bazooka.”
Cue the Worldwide inflation.
Just a few weeks ago I did a video about how China is on the edge of recession. Weeks later, the edge of recession has now progressed to a full-blown Chinese fire drill.
So What Happened?
Last week, China’s ruling Politburo held an emergency economic meeting and decided to crank up the money printers to 11, pumping money to consumers, to banks, to property developers, basically to anybody who might spend it.
Bloomberg called it an “adrenaline shot,” as in it’ll pump assets but won’t last long.
Specifically, Beijing’s going to dump about 3.8 trillion yuan – roughly half a trillion dollars – to keep the economy running.
A trillion yuan goes to consumer subsidies, including a hundred twenty US per month child subsidy – a hundred twenty’s big in China – to bribe Chinese mothers into having more kids, which they’ve stopped doing.
Next up are the banks – as always – who get a cool hundred and forty billion US along with another 100 billion dumped into stock markets.
Stay Informed with Brownstone Institute
Allegedly this is all to spur spending – as in the banks lend the money out and the stockholders feel rich – but it would do wonders for the gaping holes in China’s teetering financial industry.
Beyond the Money Dump
Beyond the money dump, China’s slashing interest rates across the board – which governments do to try and gin up some tissue-fire growth.
They’re slashing downpayment requirements on houses, opening a special credit facility so banks and hedge funds can gamble on stocks, and cutting the reserve requirements for banks – meaning banks can raid their vaults and go on a lending spree.
Put it together, and Beijing’s doing everything it can to get money out in the wild, down to bankrolling gamblers and pouring yet more trillions down the black hole of China’s comically over-built housing market.
You may have seen the ghost towns China’s built; here comes round two.
What Scares China
Why so desperate, you might ask?
Easy: China is panicked not only about a looming recession but that it might be falling into the Japan-style doom-loop of structural stagnation thanks to President Xi’s anti-business jihad.
The key number here is the interest rate on 30-year government bonds, which is a classic indicator of a zombie economy in the spawning.
Ominously, China’s 30-year just fell below Japan’s. Flirting with zombie territory.
What’s Next
Near-term, they’re popping the bubble in Beijing with stocks soaring.
And while 4 trillion yuan is a lot of money, this isn’t yet the Big Bang – that would be a long-rumored 10 trillion money dump by Beijing.
They’re not there yet, probably because the US and Europe haven’t hit the meat of their recessions. Debt-fueled Americans are still buying Chinese exports.
If and when that breaks down, either because Americans are out of money or Trump rolls out tariffs on China, Beijing’s up against the wall, and it will blow out into worldwide inflation.
China’s Turn for Chaos
I’ve mentioned in previous articles how if China goes down, the Chinese people won’t have a sense of humor about it. This ain’t Japan where people shake their heads and obey.
Beijing knows this, they know the kinetic history of the Chinese masses when they’re angry, and if they panic hard enough they may reach for a war to both distract the population and to clamp down on dissent.
Just this week they launched a massive military exercise in a disputed area of the South China Sea, there could be more to come.
Republished from the author’s Substack
-
Business1 day ago
Bureaucrats are wasting your money faster than you can say “bottoms up!”
-
Economy17 hours ago
Canadians should understand costs of expanding Old Age Security
-
Business2 days ago
More government interventions hamper capitalism
-
International1 day ago
Barron Trump Shut Out by Bank Amid Cancel Culture Accusations
-
Business20 hours ago
What Inter-Provincial Migration Trends Can Tell Us About Good Governance
-
Community20 hours ago
First Battle of Alberta this NHL season to bring big boost to Child Advocacy Centre!
-
Christopher Rufo2 days ago
In Charleroi, Pennsylvania, the local population grapples with a surge of Haitian migrants.
-
Christopher Rufo2 days ago
An exclusive interview with a Haitian immigrant from Charleroi, Pennsylvania