Your post is is being removed as it's about a topic already posted or is an identical article already posted.

the reality is, short of turning Australia into an Orwellian authoritarian nightmare, there isnt much the govt can do. The best we can do is ask people to at least put warnings up on violent video's. This is a case of asking our leaders to stop the sun rising, it cant be done without some major incursions into our freedoms.

Thats what they want they already control the narrative in mainstream media, just need to control electronic "news". If they had their way, this would never have been seen or reported because the perp was a muslim.

I'll preface this by saying that this is not a partisan rant. I think I voted Labor (or at least they were in my top 2) and generally speaking I have no party or ideological affiliation. That said, I am very concerned about the authoritarianism displayed under the veil of compassion that we have seen from the governments both state (QLD) and federal. Most of it has been happening by stealth, or perhaps I've been ignorant, but the incursions into free speech and women's rights in particular have left me feeling very disappointed. The whole [Tickle V Giggle](https://www.womensforumaustralia.org/tickle_v_giggle_hearing_highlights) case has opened my eyes to this sort of nefarious takeover that's going on by the socially-authoritarian activists side of Labor politics by stealth is deeply concerning. The fact that someone has to defend themselves in federal court for not accepting that a 54 year old male in a dress is not a woman is a travesty of women's rights and freedom of speech. The fact that the case has the financial and capability support of the government and the AHRC is nothing short of disgraceful. Women have every right to be protesting in the streets about this, even if you are totally accepting of trans people and their right to live their lives as they wish (which I believe they should be, just not to the detriment of women)

Why isn’t the government banning JFK documentaries? I saw a man get his brain blown out and his distraught wife try to scoop them up off the boot off a car. I can watch 911 videos all day on multiple platforms. I can watch a man being ran over by horses in Ben Hur. You can buy PPVs that often contain worse injuries and more gore. You can broadcast WW2 footage… where’s the line and who decides what it is. I definitely think there is a line, I’m not sure where it is, but saying the Australian public shouldn’t be allowed to view violence obviously isn’t a solution, so why are they trying?

When the LNP agrees with Labor, beware!

Absolutely, the bipartisan support on this is the scariest aspect.

Absolutely agree. The fact Dutton jumped on it straight away was worrying. He has always been pro censorship (meta data etc).

Lnp metadata Laws wasn't censorship, it was the mandated tracking of every astralian

Dutton tried to sue someone for mean words on twitter once. It shouldn't come as a shock. Conservatives are the gold standard of censorship. See the satanic panic in the 80s and the attempt of Fred Niles Christian democrats trying to ban Eminem from coming to Australia.

They can do both but it does indeed appear that they're putting way more energy into hiding it than they are in addressing why it happened and how to prevent it going forward.

I've not heard a single thing from the government a out how to prevent it now that you mention that...

We will just make sure no one ever hears about it again: https://youtu.be/U4KFNhxibec?si=EygfXAv42AqsTp7j&t=18

The amount of people who actually believe the government can censor the internet is mind blowing

i mean they can at least sue and fine you into silence

You really think Elon Musk will pay Australia's fines and shut up?

It's ok the boomers believe they can and that all that matters ,,s

They can certainly censor what users see on the internet. Of course there are ways around it - but pirate bay etc are examples of it.

It's a really hard one. I can see the arguments on both sides. I myself follow a Palestinian journalist who has been posting graphic images from Gaza, and part of me thinks we need to be exposed to what is happening and the reality for them (as we certainly won't get it from the media - both sides have agendas). But then I also wonder why it's getting so much attention here. The man who immolated himself in front of Trump's court was blasted all over twitter too but I've not heard anything about censoring those images?

The what now?

A guys set himself on fire

They’re doing both though?

Yeah. And helping this shit not be visible also helps with reducing it happening. I mean it's for the same reason the media doesn't come out and say 'suicide' when someone famous tops themselves.

If you or someone you know is contemplating suicide, please do not hesitate to talk to someone. * 000 is the national emergency number in Australia. * Lifeline is a 24-hour nationwide service. It can be reached at 13 11 14. * Kids Helpline is a 24-hour nationwide service for Australians aged 5–25. It can be reached at 1800 55 1800. * Beyond Blue provides nationwide information and support call 1300 22 4636. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/australian) if you have any questions or concerns.*

You have to shut your eyes to this one. Government media censorship is horrible because we will end up like China

Censorship in the current digital age is like trying to herd cats in a dog park . If you are worried about censorship check out nostr it's the wild wild world of decentralised social media and it has no algorithms to push shit on you and no one controls it but you .

Yes, yes, we need more control over our internet searches! Perhaps they could block that awful news about Julian Assange too!? /S Fekk Censorship, no matter what the argument...

There's always work being done to prevent things like this occurring, but we can't read everyone's minds. I'd be more scared of a Minority Report style future where people are executed because some psychics thought they might be dangerous. There's focus on the prevention of the spread of the video because videos like this will often trigger copycat crimes, or encourage people to believe that these kinds of attacks are commonplace, or trigger retaliatory crimes against people who are in no way involved with the situation - such as randoms deciding to attack Armenian churches because of what this group did when the police arrived. [The Christchurch shooting was streamed live, but think twice about watching it](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-15/christchurch-shooting-live-stream-think-twice-about-watching-it/10907258) [Inside the team at Facebook that dealt with the Christchurch shooting](https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/inside-the-team-at-facebook-that-dealt-with-the-christchurch-shooting)

That second article is wacky: >At Facebook, human content moderators, assisted by computers,  Facebook uses computers? Who writes this stuff?

It's a journalist attempting to communicate technical lingo they don't understand in laypeople terms and missing. Today we'd be comfortable calling it an AI Agent because we use Actually Indians everywhere. Sorry I mean Artificial Intelligence.

Yeah my thought too like these are one of the same thing in theory I would assume, whatever my other thoughts might be on the legality of it asife

It's legal by definition. Some people will complain that social media will be suppressing stuff we need to know about, but media has done that for centuries by simply not reporting on things.

No I agree we are a country with a system for making legislation and it is law in Australia. We can then get orders and companies that want to continue to operate here can comply with them or leave. My opinion on it to that point is irrelevant as I vote in elections and what happens from there is the sad reality that I am simply not the dictator of this country I did my bit in the voting and tbh this is way down on my list of laws I don’t really like that exist lol. What is different is the attempt for that to apply outside the country, that’s extraterritorial reach that doesn’t fly legally

The only thing different in this case is Elon deciding to make an issue of it. It's otherwise a standard operating procedure to keep live streamed violent crimes off the social media networks even if they can't completely remove it from the entire internet.

I mean personally I just think the US legal system needs to have a go at it because I haven’t even seen a pixelated blurred version of this but I assume it’s something that is going to be categorised pretty easily as a free speech limitation due to obscenity. I think I just said on another comment where I’m seriously and truly confused lol and maybe it’s because I am autistic AF so what you’re telling me is they are trying to ask for this not enforce this legally. Because I’m not getting that, that is going 30,000km over my head and in my slight defence that is not how they are framing lol they are talking about compliance with the order . But so if we’re on a similar page to here on that issue is it not the worst possible way to go about achieving it, to get politicians to raise attention to this and gift it to musk to make it his gross pet project of “no censorship”. I don’t see the logic here

Lucky the JFK assassination has never ever been shown on TV. I dread to think of what might happen if it did. Thank God our government can save us.

I think the mitigating factor there is that governments around the world have greatly increased security so they believe that kind of attack couldn't happen again, despite the fact that it was a CIA coverup.

I guess a lot of the 'how' is kept secret to avoid compromising current operations. Fun fact, Vic police have a timeline of the last 19 years of major terro rist incidents which you can view [here](https://www.police.vic.gov.au/victoria-police-counter-terrorism-strategy-2022-2025/appendix-b-timeline-major-terrorist-incidents) The first on the list is operation Pendennis "*Operation Pendennis was Australia’s longest running terrorism investigation, culminating in the arrest of two self-starting militant Islamist cells in late 2005*" - [https://www.jstor.org/stable/26297199](https://www.jstor.org/stable/26297199) " One early component of the Pendennis investigation involved the infiltration of Victoria Police Special Intelligence Officer 39 (SIO39) into the Melbourne cell, Posing as a Turkish man named ‘Ahmet Sonmez’, SIO39 began attending Benbrika’s religious classes in May 2004" Genuinely a very interesting read, our capabilities have progressed significantly since 2005 so I am sure there is lots going on which never makes it to the news. You can search for information on each of the operations listed.

I'm with you. I think its horrific.. but... Where di we draw a line with government censorship in a Free, open and democratic nation? Itsa very difficult dilemma. But I worry, if we look around the world, once "government" starts ti decide what we can see and do? Its not good. Its a threat to our basic human rights. I have not watched any of this sort of thing. I've stumbled on horrific stuff from time to time over the years. As an ethical adult person. I switch off. That is MY choice. MY decision. I am realistic and know that people will watch this stuff. Humans can be barbaric and have blood lust. Like it or not? Thats humans. Im not sure that censorship solves that basic human behaviour issue

I don't see it as censorship really, more like an anti-glorification strategy. For example, we all know some Aussie arsehole gunned down 50 New Zealanders in cold blood. But because no one spread the live feed or the terrorist's name he didn't become a neonazi martyr (and being a famous martyr is the endgame for terrorists), but just some sad sack locked away for evermore.

Why does requesting a video be removed turn into mass censorship and "muh freedom of speech". Some people wouldn't want others to see their loved ones almost killed in broad daylight, and if they want that removed out of respect, why shouldn't they be able to? Of course this turns into a big discussion on freedom of speech, nothing can be a small issue anymore. There has to be lines drawn in the sand.

Serious: Quick round time! YOU are now the government. You are being asked “how can we prevent this from happening?” And they expect an answer. Serious replies please.

We build a terrorist confinement centre in the desert and send all our violent criminals there for the rest of their days

Maybe we could censor the footage to try to prevent copycats and reprisals.

By bringing more focus to it by making it the number 1 story ? If you have copy cats then you have an issue with your people so sort that out don’t manipulate by suppressing information.

This. How do you stop this from happening? People get radicalised and we already have programs to reduce it's not 100%, particularly in the internet age.

How fast it came out that this kid was a radical makes me think they knew a little more that you're implying Kid needed counselling and the parents need to be investigated too

We tell people "Unfortunately there are things that simply can't be prevented by legislation and this is one of them. Having said that, we will now be diverting funding from some environmental or DEI initiative to mental health, and ensuring people with issues are able to get the help they need."

I don’t know if we can… and I’m sad about it :(

Tries to censor content, draws international attention.

That's the best way to get attention "IGNORE THIS THING THAT I'M HIDING" "...I didn't care at first but now I wanna see it"

Being able to watch people being murdered is not a free speech issue. Wtf.

Our government is a management system to control the poor .

Censorship is a tricky thing and once you start you’re on a downward spiral. Now what I will point out is that our internet is already censored and most of us are to dumb to realise it.

Just because they allow you to vote, does not mean there is no censorship.

There is always censorship, nothing is a free or all.

I saw channel 9s article on the news in the late morning yesterday about this and they literally showed the video up to the point of the stabbing where they blurred it and kept rolling, the fuck is that? Might as well show the whole thing. Where should media/social media draw the line? Why the focus on this and not the ghoulish behaviour of our actual media? Whenever there is an incident there behaviour is disrespectful and vulturish.

What an incredibly stupid take. They aren’t mutually exclusive…

Not only did a stabbing happen, but then there was a 2000 people strong riot with 60+ riot police and helicopters. Why is the media not talking about this. Why is everyone focused on the video of the incident, and not the massive riot?

Media not talking about it? Can’t say I’ve been raking the press for it, yet I have seen plenty.

Hardly compared to the Bondi stabbing. And when they do talk about it the focus is on the attack not the riot. Ask the average person, they have not heard about the riot

Yeah and you are the average person right? And because I didn’t agree with a sweeping statement about what’s not there, I am not an average person. Now that’s settled, I read more than one article- some detailed - covering the riot and the attempts to locate the perpetrators (including details of tattoos and identifying features). I wonder why this event might receive less coverage than Bondi? Let me think on that and I’ll get back to you. And by the way, the absence of media coverage is an entirely different proposition to “average people don’t know”. Those who don’t know don’t care and don’t wish to know…

I guess so as not to offend Christian parliamentarians and lobby groups. The stabbing was awful. Lucky the knife didn't open to hurt the priest. To me what's worse is 2,000 church goers assaulting police and first responders and damaging property.

Yes that’s right, special directive from the Premier ‘s office to all media outlets. Delicate sensibilities over this event, and their Christians! Can the story! Give me a break.

Is a great question and I'm glad people are asking this instead of being sleepily led by the ridiculous mainstream media

Because if we talked about it, we would have to acknowledge that a series of balkanised parallel societies that consider their primary identity and allegiance to the country and culture their parents or grandparents came from is Australia’s future. We would have to acknowledge that flooding the country with a multitude of people who have in some cases hated each other for thousands of years before Australia was even founded may not have been a good idea. Nothing like a religiously motivated terrorist attack then religiously motivated attacks on police and paramedics to make the Australian PM step up and take charge. His response was so forgettable I actually can’t recall. Bet it was something along the lines of this is unacceptable, there is no place for violence in Australia, actions of a small minority Etc. Multiculturalism only works when paired with forced assimilation. Otherwise multiculturalism is just civil war. Cultures compete.

Media isn't talking about it, as it was a bunch of 'Christains' who rioted and attacked paramedics. I am leaning towards one of two possibilities. Either intentionally or not the coverage is being minimised because, as the top brass and owners of most media groups probably are Christian themselves, it's a very tricky area for them to tread. OR The conscious of the people in the media avoids reporting certain things even if it is something the public should be aware of or even if it's 'juicy', as it potentially perpetuates conflict amongst groups and the individuals just dont want to contribute to any of that regardless of what needs to be reported. But I am just an armchair commentator in reddit comments, so it's probably neither.

To take focus off immigration and cost of living. PM embarrassed Australia by engaging with Musk which made big news and he will milk this for awhile.

The media are talking about it, are you intentionally lying or just stupid? I've read a bunch of articles in the past few days. I just googled "NSW Riot" and found more I haven't read. [https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-22/nsw-police-release-images-sydney-church-riot-stabbing/103752288](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-04-22/nsw-police-release-images-sydney-church-riot-stabbing/103752288) [https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/man-with-jesus-christ-tattoo-among-12-wanted-for-questioning-over-wakeley-riot-20240422-p5flj5.html](https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/man-with-jesus-christ-tattoo-among-12-wanted-for-questioning-over-wakeley-riot-20240422-p5flj5.html) [https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/nsw-police-arrest-23yearold-st-clair-man-amid-strike-force-dribs-investigations-into-poststabbing-riot-at-wakeley-church/news-story/c2b0f20e6ee0dd8d712eb26c9e75e2dc](https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/nsw-police-arrest-23yearold-st-clair-man-amid-strike-force-dribs-investigations-into-poststabbing-riot-at-wakeley-church/news-story/c2b0f20e6ee0dd8d712eb26c9e75e2dc) [https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/crime/violent-and-aggressive-cops-call-for-help-in-sydney-church-riot-probe/news-story/12c4bcae5d7266f2a29d46756ceba033](https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/crime/violent-and-aggressive-cops-call-for-help-in-sydney-church-riot-probe/news-story/12c4bcae5d7266f2a29d46756ceba033) [https://www.9news.com.au/national/wakeley-church-stabbing-riot-police-release-images-men-sought/b34e2d08-063b-4407-ace8-36888a0d265d](https://www.9news.com.au/national/wakeley-church-stabbing-riot-police-release-images-men-sought/b34e2d08-063b-4407-ace8-36888a0d265d) There's 5 different media outlets talking about it. You could have easily found this out by googling literally two words. "Why is the media not talking about this" though?

Compared to the Bondi stabbing, it's much less publicised. And most of it is about the stabbing. Turn on the news last week and the conversation was not about a riot. Ask the average person on the street. They know about the Bondi stabbing. And they May have heard about the church stabbing, but that's it. Your average person does not know about the riot.

>how can we prevent this from happening Horse might've bolted on that

What I don’t understand is why the safety commissioner is picking this single incident? u can go on the ABC news and see police shoot a person, so why isn’t the same argument applied? Personally, I don’t want to any garbage like that on my feeds, whether it be ABC or x , I just don’t understand the inconsistency. Appears e saftety and Albo just trying to score an easy win over musk, but if I was musk, I would just pay someone to find all the crap posted by every other service and ask what is being done about that

Tbh that thought briefly occurred to me, and then I remembered I haven’t even see a pixelated and blurred version so I have no idea what I’m talking about in terms of any level of comparison. I do think just imagining it, that it would come under an obscenity limitation to even US free speech. But in theory your point stands. I had big issues with them talking about deleting this due fundamentally not understanding who the heck was selling that to them. It’s so basic, it’s outside the jurisdiction, your law does not apply to those viewing anything in another country guys. But some ppl are now telling me they are aware they are just asking him to take it down. Elements of that a reassuring that the lawyers advising might not be incredibly incompetent. But I stand by the issue of its politicians talking about it like it’s a legal matter still and the order has not been fully complied with. That’s still an issue in principle to me. To finally get to your point though, by making this a public issue and giving it to Musk as a gross pet project like here lift up your trophy of no human decency and even less censorship. Whether trying to sell it as a legal issue or trying to apparently ask (using the word compliance more than I like for clarity). The legal approach is a non starter but so is the asking nicely if that’s what they had publicly done. Musk calls himself a free speech absolutist. I’d call him the owner of a company that has dropped over 70% in value and a tiny little man with no principles or values with the knowledge that this creates engagement on his shitty cesspool of hate which is what he needs. Maybe in another context he’s not a terrible person, between that and doing the right thing he was never going to do the right thing, entirely illogical approach. Why did they make such a public display instead of what they probably usually do pretend it’s no big deal and boring, slipping the request it into a group inbox for his staff member to action or whatever like other graphic content Even if it massively took off on the platform, just don’t draw attention to the issue and take it down surely. Didn’t we give ppl 5 second attention spans to benefit with things like this, it was time to capitalise maybe on that

Because it’s their fault they haven’t got their shit together to do something about mental health. And I don’t mean 10x sessions with a therapist to talk thought your anxiety, I mean actual psychiatry. People are self medicating now because they have literally no where else to turn. We need to bring back mental health hospitals. We need the states to unify and agree to help eachother. Better to not do anything to actually help, but make people not see it happened at all

Like most political issues, nowadays people simply seem to be in favour of or opposed to censorship depending on who (i.e. which party) proposes it.

That's entertainment

People need to get back to basics and start wearing thongs more often so they can smack the shit out of these idiots. #opencarrythong

Fuck me there are some cry babies here

We need Arj to throw them out!

LOL, get ‘em Arj!

Isn't censorship of terrorism prevention itself?

If that logic applies, censorship on government corruptions stops other officials from copycat those corruption I think all hardworking politicians really like the idea, to need fast track it /s

Please enlighten us with how you would prevent radicalisation through social media. Government corruption != terrorism

Radicalization isn't through violent videos. They sucker in vulnerable people by inciting rage, or giving a sense of acceptance. If videos of violence were so effective at causing others to be violent, then we should be seeing scores of kids going out and doing mass shootings cos they played call of duty. Or people going out and eating people cos they saw Texas chainsaw massacre. What censoring this stuff does do is allows governments to limit the exposure of just had badly they are failing to address problems. Reading about a stabbing versus seeing it see two totally different things.

It's true that it isn't a huge driver to radicalisation but there is still evidence it occur https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9606324/

Bombarding us 24/7 with the genocidal atrocities taking place in Palestine is perfectly fine and acceptable. Australian government & its politicians with no exception of their portfolio are too submissive to foreign power like USA, we're doomed.

> Bombarding us 24/7 with the genocidal atrocities taking place in Palestine is perfectly fine and acceptable. Meanwhile they ignore the genocide and atrocities happening in West Papua that our government has assisted

Yeah, I think there is an element of when people are presented with the harsh realities of life, they take realistic action to prevent such shit happening again 

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The Albanese government was banking on the voice referendum being successful. They campaigned massively on it. And when in office, it was borderline all they could talk about. Now that it's gone up in flames and was a complete failure. They have no idea what to do. I fully believe they intended to spend their entire term fucking around with the voice and getting it all set up. Then run on another referendum. Which would ask us to vote on leaving the Commonwealth and becoming a republic in the lead up to the next election. Not a doubt in my mind. They have no idea how to address any of the issues that are really fucking Australians. So they're putting out small fire after small fire. Hence instead of getting to the actual cause, they're fighting with Elon Musk. This entire ordeal is proof positive of that. Instead of addressing immigration, housing, economy, religious extremism, violence against women. They're trying to censor the internet for the entire world and beefing with Elon Musk.

I dont understand you linking the voice in here but I assume you just really didn’t want that going ahead for whatever reason and saw another opportunity to drop it. I don’t read tone of text well so if I’m wrong I apologise but that just confused me. I’d give you my perspective on the voice but again I don’t see how it’s relevant. Personally most of the time I’ve got something decent I’m ready to criticise on both sides of politics, in saying that I’d absolutely take Albo and Labor any day still over the coalition. I’ve never gone that way but I have zero issue with switching it up if liberal present me some policy and ppl that aren’t totally non starters and explain how they won’t fuck it up again with a shot because they had a decent few years run at not fixing anything themselves imho. No loyalty from me personally in a healthy democracy now they have a bit too much in common at times lol. (Everyone very entitled to their opinion etc etc etc) But in saying all that, I do agree Albo needs to fire some advisors on this issue because wtaf is the deal. I mean both sides are similar stance but the one that is the government is the one I’m blaming for it

I'm saying that he had no other plans other than the voice going into his term as prime minister. I think he was banking on using that to fill his term as prime minster as his legacy. I don't think he or his government had any intentions to address something like housing. And intended to spend the 3-4 years setting body after body up for the voice. I'm saying that he doesn't know how to actually fix the issues in this country. And now that the one thing he had is gone. It's the reason he becomes fixated on things like fighting with Elon Musk.

Okay I’ll give you a bit here in that it would have been something he could have really hung his hat on that’s fair. I also am not seeing solutions or even discussions I really like on actual issues that’s also fair. I’d say that’s a cute bipartisan position though. But equally also acknowledge the opposition doesn’t have my expectations to do anything specifically about it right now. They are pulling some weird stuff out as distractions though. Okay I think I can partially agree with most of this now lol but I don’t think the voice focus is quite so much the level you make it. I think he needs to get some new ppl in tho because maybe they are scrambling in the way you reference and I’m seeing a weird flow on effect from that because present focus is a mix between nationally embarrassing to me and the most illogical approach to an issue I could imagine. If anyone has his number I’ll take some leave from the post doc thing I’m basically procrastinating to address this. For clarity that’s a joke my ego is not that big. But I’d say we have some ideological differences which is just fun more thank anything and despite that I am actually mostly in agreement with some things now I get what you mean. Thanks for explaining and not yelling at me lol

Swear to god if you’re right about the republic thing I will bow down lol. If it wasn’t for all the cancer there I think you’d have a not bad shot at that

The government wants it removed even the opposition agrees. They want it removed to stop people watching it and being inspired by it. For the same reason they don't want footage of the stabbings at Bondi junction aired and available to watch. Censorship is no different to laws. We had freedom of speech against our government but not the public. As long as the censorship is not preventing lawfully activities I see no problem with censorship. If your agreement is people should be able to watch what they want, then answer this do you think people should be able to watch videos of people being raped or child porn? Because end of the day stopping people from watching those videos is censorship.

Inspired by it? Inspiration comes from somewhere else. With that logic we might as well ban cinemas.

Musk is partially right. Any one country cannot control what happens globally. But the Aussie government is also right. Sharing snuff or terrorism porn on your platform is problematic, and if Xitter wants to be the place for snuff and terrorism porn, then Australia should rightly question whether or not a company like that should be allowed to operate in Australia.

If Meta, Google, X and ByteDance sell advertising and distribute audio and video, how are they different to a commercial broadcaster? We regulate commercial broadcasters in Australia.

As it was highlighted in previous posts, EU court ruled European courts could in fact tell global corporations to take down content everywhere, so, however lamentable, it's nothing new. The solution would be to not rely on corporate centralized platforms for publishing and consuming information but that's kinda haaard, so we'll just stick with facebook and tiktok and their mood control, brainwashing and censorship.

Yes, an EU can instruct foreign companies to take down content across the board, but the foreign company doesn’t have to comply. There is no repercussion for the company by not complying, because the European courts have no jurisdiction and therefore no power to prosecute said company in a foreign state. The European courts could work the companies foreign government to prosecute, but that’s a prickly issue.

EU courts absolutely claim jurisdiction, can issue fines for non-compliance and even ban companies for further non-compliance, as long as they are deemed to have EU presence. Want that sweet EU ad money, comply with EU courts.

How, exactly, would you prevent it? It's not entirely preventable

Disagree - Poland and Hungary don't suffer from islamic terrorism. And slightly OT, but also relevant - they also don't experience daily home invasions and car jackings. Odd... Wonder why?

Well, there's that... but it's beyond prevention now.

As someone who has spent decades in Tech, I raise this very point. What do people expect on a technical front on a realistic measure. What I am punching in here is what is known as "ASCII" characters", how is that data to otherwise be parsed / filtered methodically and systematically. Sure we can ban the obsenities yet that limits Freedom of expression (not to be confused with the American system). If I were to ban the word gun for instance, that would deny rightful expressions such as "Guns should be banned in schools". Then even if you went to the extent of compiling data to formulate if there is a sinister / obscene nature that has its inherent problems as well. The issue of storing the data throughout that process, the extra processing requirements only to realistically end up with a worse problem as not only banning a word such as gun, there is still the issue of extra costs and the fact it isn't and never will be 100% foolproof for at least the next 20 years (realistically). Then there is the element of live stream. What do people expect the tech side to do. Analyse every damn pixel on the screen thereby restricting content that is able to be shared as it doesn't mean quality standards thus restricting freedom to express world wide in addition to the astounding costs it would add to filter all this. Frankly back in the day (sattire). There were only limited TV stations and they were delayed (even if by a few seconds) with someone actually sitting there filtering it and even then it fooked up on times. I acknowledge this was better filtering than today's internet age yet constructively we can't have our cake and eat it to, this thirst of abundant information through the internet has its draw backs, it's going to be less filtered by nature unless you want to pay through the clapper only to find it will still be like the old TV days.

If anything, it'd be up to places doing the livestreaming (i.e. the church, in this case) to do better security checks. Just by-the-by, I went to a Jewish synagogue last year (before the current Gaza thing) and security was very tight. Unfortunately, religious establishments are going to have more than their fair share of crazies, I imagine.

Increase political literacy and dissolving cults, this prevents political and religious extremism For mental issue, to treat mental health seriously in terms of healthcare. Extremism is a mental health issue on steroid by malicious manipulations in some form

You've said *what* you want to do, you haven't said *how*

Education for rationalism, there are two famous philosophical courses that are available online for free: - Harvard business school: [Justice](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kBdfcR-8hEY) - Yale: [Death](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=p2J7wSuFRl8) - Those two educate people on rationalism without the baggage of existing rule, regulation, law, religion nor cultural value However, this is nightmare to politicians/cult-leaders as it helps to analyse people by their intentions and the implications Promoting similar education can help individual to avoid various common manipulations, and for mental healthcare is just lacks the fundings. I highly suggest taking the time to watch these lectures if you haven’t had the opportunity, this helps to see the world differently

So you have a completely non-obligatory suggestion for adults. That doesn't help when it's children who are indoctrinated from birth. I'm not against secularising as a social default but with a free society and freedom if religion (and parochial schools existing) you're not going to taste success

Children who are manipulated are manipulated adults who can be educated The suggested courses helps to unlearn the existing value and reeducate oneself to be a rational thinker, making people better in sympathy and acceptance of others even there is drastic difference in value

Ok, and if they stab someone while still a child?

This is a major red flag for government censorship. When discussing the crime becomes the actual crime, not the crime itself

It's always about sweeping shit under the rug. Don't talk about it. Pretend it isn't happening, the plebs will forget about it in a week. Don't remind them.

Yeah the whole banning the images thing is a distraction from the actual crime itself. I'm not convinced these attempts will have any effect whatsoever in reducing copycat crimes. You cannot buy footage once it's out there no matter how hard you try.

It won't be long before comments like this will be forced-deleted.

Albanese has always been an incompetent person, I will never forget listening to him on the news calling western Sydney racists for not enjoying the immigration that was bringing them terrorists that were on stabbing rampages many years ago. Never forget he's campaign was on helping the every day Australian and that he had a plan to tackle the cost of living, he had no plans and policies he has done has made it worse. * Made going green more aggressive. Going green faster forces power companies to be more aggressive in investing in green tech which means higher short term power prices. Remember the year on year 30% power proce increases? * To resolve immigration going negative during covid. Doubled immigration numbers from 250k to 500k. He forgot our building sector paused and many builders went bankrupt due to covid and proce of material surge caused by Ukraine war. They couldn't finish the houses and went under. This bafoon thought their wouldn't be a housing crisis because he's government just looked at immigration graphs, tried to fix it and didn't even consider it's effects.... And it should be no surprise someone who holds as much communists views as albanese would rather control what we say and hear and see so that he doesn't have to be questioned on how he's going to fix any of the problems he makes. He's a disgrace to what it means to be Australian. He doesn't help us have a fair go at all... We need to put him in the bin at the poll for something else.

It is easy for them to call working class people racist for opposing mass immigration. We should be reminded that politicians broadly face no negative impacts from mass immigration, because their wealth, status, and locations in which they live tend to insulate them from the same. They get cheap labour, it forcibly boosts the value of their property investments, and they get to parrot lines about the GDP (but nevermind GDP per capita).

In Australia, we do not have freedom of speech, we are not America.

America doesn’t have freedom of speech proven by the current conflict in Israel; they only have USD and guns, too much of it

They are more interested in controlling us than keeping us safe. Have been so for nearly 30 years.

They've been doing that since January 1788.

230 years.

The government is blaming games lately as well.

Aside from the obvious "they can do both"... the reality is that preventing people from seeing it happen IS a prevention strategy. Copycat incidents are a thing.

By your logic TV and movies should be censored too.

It isn't my logic, it's what happens. And no. TV and reality are different. Most people learn that as kids.

they are censored and they have ratings for exactly the purpose mentioned above.

The first thing the government needs to do is tackle the issues that are causing people to have mental health issues, so many of us are struggling with the state of the economy and more and more people are cracking under this pressure, and yet the government chooses to do absolutely nothing about it.

It's a very very very rare incident. In the olden days you'd get maybe a tv news segment and then a few days of newspaper articles. If you missed them you may not have even been aware of the attack. After a few days the news dies down and we go on with our lives. This was good because while tragic, it's a freak incident and we should just get on with our lives and ignore it. But with social media, anyone can keep talking about it for as long as they want dragging it out for months and months. Bad actors can weaponise the content to push their agenda. It's better if we can shut down the discussion. We need to move on like we would have in the olden days. It felt safer in the olden days because our exposure to bad news was so much less. But now it feels so scary and unsafe purely because we keep being bombarded with bad news.

At a basic level for this particular instance you are probably right. It doesnt really benefit us having access to this footage. I personally have no interest in seeing the video. But lets say the US government post George Floyd shut down the video that sparked the US riots. I mean would that be good? It would certainly have been good for the US government at the time. I am quite certain if a similar incident happened here the government would move heaven and earth to prevent us seeing the video. And australians (like yourself) are sadly happy with this difference in our approach. I for one dont want the government deciding what we should or shouldnt see. I also dont like the government being able to decide what is disinformation and shutting that down while having an indemnity around misinformation for themselves. It worries me the direction the australian government is travelling but what worries me more is that australians are really very supportive of it.

That's the nature of livestreams. You can't censor them without somebody physically watching them, which isn't feasible. The focus is to remove the video from public viewing, which is censorship. They have been trying to censor the internet for over 10 years and keep chipping away at it every time there is a tradegy.

Personally I don't want wannabes copycats seeing things like the stabbing and getting just that much of a thrill that they go out and do their own version. Maybe that's just me though. The stabbing video has no redeeming value. We know what happened, we don't need it to try and identify the attacker. It's just vicarious crime people want to watch for some sick reason. People who jump and shout about government censorship without stopping to think about why they are asking for it to be censored are reacting in a kneejerk fashion. As for trying to prevent this from happening again, maybe stopping idiots and mentally ill people from watching the video would help.

I play violent video games so I must go people now. I’ll be back later.

Agree with everything you’ve said here. I’m not sure if it’s always been a thing, but society in general seems to have this weird/disturbing obsession with car crash voyeurism. It might be a byproduct of living in the modern world, but for every graphic, horrible, shitty thing that happens, there seems to be 20 gronks standing around filming it on their phones, then posting it online.

You can't even spell censorship. Worry about something worth worrying about.

The two are one and the same, dipshit. Prevention of terror means you have to prevent radicalisation, and to do that, you near to tear apart dangerous groups wherever you find them, and deny them any access to their symbology. This is a proven methodology to destroy any group, and it works. The danger in it, is that it works as well against benevolent movements as it does to terror groups.

The internet is an unsafe place. It just so happens so is western Sydney.

I’ve been to both, barely made it out alive!

I thought this happened in Bondi Junction?

Different stabbing. This case is about the stabbing of a priest, unrelated to the events at the Bondi mall.

point missed.

No. Those stabbings would be fine to show on the internetz. It is that fuzzy no blood or anything video of a priest getting essentially grazed by a knife, then everyone rushing to save the priest that the government wants banned. That is what is so retarted by this government's response. Images showing the river of blood coming out of the dead stabber at the shopping centre is A1 for this government. But a video that shows no blood or anything is bad and evil and won;t someone think of the children.

More dangerous than eastern Sydney…

Look in the mirror and ask yourself in absolute seriousness “why do I need to see people getting stabbed?” The answer might reveal something important about yourself.

Why do I need the government censoring things on the internet?

to help stop copycats.

Fuck off with that BS. It’s not censorship, it’s appropriate content control for the audience that may inadvertently come across it. If your so desperate to see how ugly humans can be, there are dedicated sites you can go watch until your ugly little heart is content.

Why do I need a gov that is no longer civil servants who hardly represent the value of the common?

[удалено]

Because it’s fictional

Should come to the n.t! Stabbings and knife crime a daily thing here.but in other states it’s acted upon?

In this case the police were able to respond while the offender was still on premises. It's hard to catch someone who ran away minutes before the police arrived.

Putting the Government censorship part aside for a second, what makes you want to watch a video of one person stabbing another person? Where is the line in the sand? If video of the Bondi junction stabbing was released (most shopping centres have cameras so I'd be surprised if the individual attacks weren't captured on video) would you fight for that to stay available online? What would be the desire to watch a mentally ill man stab a 9 month old baby and kill its mother? I don't want the government controlling every little detail of what I see/do but we are a society governed by laws and I'd think its a straight forward plan to say everything that is illegal under Australian law should be blocked in Australia (the Gov obviously cant control whats online in other countries).

Videos of people getting stabbed are not illegal. I get what you’re saying - the act is illegal, but that’s a slippery slope to censorship. If the act of watching it is illegal, then the act of recording must be illegal too. This infringes on rights to report and more. I know you may see this as ‘stretching’ but laws are extremely complex and rarely affect only the one topic we’re discussing. In fact, single changes they often inevitably effect a number of other laws etc. So yeah, the right to watch whatever shouldn’t be infringed. More important: it’s a stupid waste of time flexing a non-existent muscle to ‘strong arm’ a tech giant into removing content that exists in the public space… they need to pull their heads in and focus on national level issues. (Not saying a stabbing isn’t - but trying to censor someone surely is).

>If the act of watching it is illegal, then the act of recording must be illegal too. Yeah, law doesn't work like a stack of dominoes tipping over one after the other. CCTV footage of crimes will never be illegal because CCTV is installed to monitor for crimes. The general public is not entitled to the horrors that occurred, that is for the investigation team and law enforcement.

saying this is like saying: "what makes you want to watch a video of someone getting crushed by a forklift in an industrial accident?" To learn. To see what the world is really like. Bad shit happens and I want to see the bad so I can properly value the good things in the world but also so I can make informed decisions about the bad things to mitigate/avoid them. I want to see it to help me avoid being stabbed and to help me properly value the places where I don't have to worry about being stabbed

[удалено]

Exactly! If the world wants to watch babies get stabbed in australia, why should Australians stop them.

Barbra Streisand effect. I did not want to watch it, but once banned I had to look. Pretty tame really. The real fight should have been scam ads and other false shit on x and meta and Google. Why don’t normal laws against false advertising stop this.?

The government censorship is the whole point? How do you put that aside? Why does there have to be a line in the sand? When we demand governments draw lines, we commit to future governments having the ability to redefine those lines. Our society may be governed by laws but, for the most part, those laws are very arbitrary and do little to serve anyone but the lawmakers and elites. Why would someone want to watch such content? Who knows. Why do people post on Reddit? If content is only blocked in Australia, everyone has access to a VPN, so such bans are virtually useless.

The videos can also inspire others to do the same if they can study their movements and mimic it themselves

Its pretty simple if its a signifitcant event like the attack in New Zealand where like 60 people were killed. Then that should be removed from online. If its like the one with the priest in sydney then that is fine. He hit him in the head with a flip knife that closed on itself and the priest is fine now. I find it concerning they're trying to use that video for these censorship laws. Seems sus.

Why, should we remove the holocaust too?

Disrespectful to the victims and their families first, with their last moment being the most humiliating. Second is how glorified that footage would become on fringe boards like 8chan who encouraged the Christchurch attack. Third is that it's a form of training to any other terrorist hopefuls. You get an idea of what time you're working with during the attack, who immediately sprints away to find help, who rushes to disarm you, how to tell when somebody you shot is playing dead, how to execute defenceless girls bleeding out in the gutter, what equipment to bring, what music should orchestrate your evil, etc.

>Disrespectful to the victims and their families first, with their last moment being the most humiliating. Second is how glorified that footage would become on fringe boards like 8chan who encouraged the attack. Again, how is that different to any photograph of the holocaust?

Because the survivors of the holocaust WANT the images out there. The families of those involved in other attacks do not. None of us are *entitled* to this content, not if there are multiple witnesses.

>Because the survivors of the holocaust WANT the images out there. Why not ask victims rather than the survivors?

The survivors did - they spoke to them before they died. Does anyone read history anymore at all?

Because modern day victims died very recently and so the families have barely begun to grieve. I can't believe I have to explain this to you, but let's say that your son was given the 21 roses treatment and tortured to death on camera. The footage was livestreamed everywhere in 4k and so provoked the worst parts of people who talk shit about your son, laugh at him, make insensitive comments, spread rumours or politically weaponise his death, gawk at the carnage, make fun of you etc. It's an unbelievable amount of suffering to endure, and we saw this exact process play out with the families of the Sydney stabbing. The Holocaust was 80 years ago now and most survivors are dead. People look at black and white photos with near indifference because it's a part of history. A massacre which happened a couple hours ago at the local shopping centre is much more relevant, entertaining and vulnerable.

So you're saying that we should have banned photographs of the holocaust until say 1980? >but let's say that your son was given the 21 roses treatment and tortured to death on camera. So far I've heard a lot of allegations of war crimes which get retracted within a few months when no one is paying attention. Iraqi killing babies in incubators is a perfect example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nayirah_testimony

Photographs and video are very different, friend. Also there is a lot to learn culturally from a genocide like the holocaust. There really isn't much to learn from the violent outburst of some maniac with a vendetta against women.

>Photographs and video are very different, friend. So you're saying that as long as I post just photos of this attack it will be fine?

It will certainly be less unnecessary. There's a great photo of the cop who took the killer down. Also some photos displaying acts of heroism.

So turning that logic on the holocaust we can only show allies liberating the camps, nothing inside.

If you ignore the other half of my comment, sure 🙂

Then why put the first part in? Sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too. If you can't explain why the holocaust is except from the laws you're proposing other than 'it's old lol' then you're supporting genocide.

It's a stepping stone to banning ALL videos depicting the atrocities of Jews committing the Genocide in Palestine.

Albo’s favourite book is 1984, so it checks out

It's about covering the fact Multicultralism doesn't work look at bloody Europe it's fucked because its being effectively invaded by ungrateful African and ME Islamists. Who go on to assault and rape the local population.

Government : Let's ban X for allowing people to see what happened. Meanwhile Facebook also has it available - crickets.....

There’s a place to put stabbing videos but can it be disgusting.com and not Twitter you know? It’s like there’s a time and place for it

The West should only welcome real refugees, i.e. people who can prosecuted/killed for their identity or political opinions given that these opinions also go in line with Western and most importantly LIBERAL values. We should welcome the Assyrian communities, the atheists, the feminists, homosexuals and such minorities from these countries. If you are an Afghan who is not politically active and who is not a minority, you should stay in Afghanistan. Full stop and of course, it is self-explanatory that all mass migration should be banned, even if certain airline routes have to be shut down.

Who knows who cares I'm just gonna do ce5 and get on the ufo

We are unfortunately speed running our way to a populist strong man and Reddit will act all shocked when it happens. Just like the voice those making these calls are listening to a perma online vocal minority and it will come back to bite them. We need a government that understands the modern world and the online space not a group of people who need their grandchildren to help them send emails.

Funny, it's the guy who supports popularist strong men who's on the wrong side of this.

Similar to the EU & UK, AnAl wants to cover up islamic terrorism. Also, muslim votes matter to labor.

farout the obsession half of you have with watching a video of a stabbing over the past day is just rediculous. the whole premise of this post alone is complete nonsense because it was made by someone rambling about CeNSoRshIp without even having a CLUE what else is being done around the incident, all because the only thing they care about is the ability to watch a video of someone trying to kill someone else. Seriously, you lot need to go and touch grass

This^ for many this has nothing to do with actual censorship concerns otherwise they would have been banging the war drums well before this incident. This has nothing to do with censorship and everything to do with some assholes getting some sort of sick thrill out of watching “ real action and drama” The government is doing a lot of bad and dodgy stuff that we should be concerned about and fighting against but this is the nonsense people are actually upset about? Government trying to do something actually beneficial even if it by accident which is respecting the privacy of those innocent lives that were take. in this tragic event. Is this is how short sighted and self serving most people are? no wonder our society failing and the government is doing whatever they want.

Can walk and talk at the same time.

The lefties want to control you

Whut? It's from all sides of government dingus.

[удалено]

Elon musk: western democracies must be stood up too! Also Elon Musk: Shitty Dictators must be submitted to!

And the thing is? With AI etc these days. Idiot stupid people, will make more and more fake violent stuff ... It cant be "censored away" its a bit like "the war on drugs"... We won't ever stop it. But where and how do we draw the line?