Tech Karen from InternetNZ tells us all that the Department of Internal Affair’s Ministry of Truth will be a once in a generation chance to blah blah blah…
A once-in-a-generation opportunity to make a safer internet
Aotearoa has a great opportunity to make its internet safer for everyone. The public have until July 31 to give feedback on the Government’s Safer Online Services and Media Platforms (Sosmp) consultation document, and what follows will hopefully revolutionise the way that platforms carrying harmful online content are regulated in New Zealand.
Right now, when we see harmful online content, like bullying, harassment, violence, racism, and extremism, we don’t have reliable ways to report it and get it investigated. This is why regulation is so important.
In considering our feedback on this, we need to listen to the voices of people currently excluded from the internet, through repeated experience of harm, or through choice because they feel silenced and threatened, and for whom the Internet is not a safe place. The horrific increase of Islamophobia in the aftermath of the Christchurch Terror Attacks is a prime example of how regulation could have helped protect the Muslim community and the harm they continue to face today. Recently, we’ve seen increased misogyny, transphobia, xenophobia, and hate speech. This could be minimised by making the platforms take responsibility for it.
…Tech Karen says it’s all a bug warm cuddle when that’s just not true.
The Confidential briefing papers show the true scale of the Department of Internal Affairs new ‘Ministry of Truth’…
…remember, woke defenders of this new ‘Ministry of Truth’ declared this was only a regulatory framework to counter social media networks to ensure consumer safety.
TDB argued it was far larger than that and was an outrageous over reach of State power to regulate free speech.
Turns out we were right.
This is well beyond changing the hate speech laws, this is an entire Bureaucratic Infrastructure upgrade that would allow the aggrieved to complain to the Ministry of Truth and the Ministry of Truth would demand the Network’s ‘Safety’ plan and would ‘audit’ the ‘safety’ plan to see if you as the Network owner are protecting the consumer safety of vulnerable people (as defined by the Ministry of Truth).
One of the fears of the change in Hate Speech Laws was that the woke would weaponise the process and demand investigations for every twitter fight since 2016, well this suggestion by the DIA codifies a means for which anyone can launch their latest lynch mob from.
This is now focused on mis/disinformation (and we know how toxic woke warriors are inside those organisations), unwanted digital communication, racism and hate speech.
Notice how that was all hidden from the public about the true nature of what the DIA have privately built here?
Under this new regime, the Ministry of Truth compels a regulation that requires ‘safety’ plans for ‘vulnerable’ people (as defined by the Ministry of Truth).
If a person complains about your content, you are required to show the Ministry your ‘Safety’ plan and if that ‘Safety’ plan is not good enough to deal with the lived experience of the vulnerable people who you have offended, you are in trouble.
It seems the vulnerable people will determine that.
If my safety plan is not robust enough, I don’t have one or if it doesn’t end up pacifying the vulnerable person, I get fined.
This is sold as a means to protect vulnerable people, it will immediately become a weaponised process that will inspire a billion new fights.
What we should be looking at, rather than a Ministry of Truth, is actual fourth estate journalism that consumers can trust, not a weaponised complaints procedure that will immediately become exploited by partisan activists masquerading as consumer safety.
What we need is a total rethink on public money spent on journalism. Currently it is handed out via a deeply invested NZ on Air who give their mates money to produce angry feminist mommy blogger podcasts no on watches.
The problem with the current model is that it is NZ on Air mates funding other NZ on Air mates to form an echo bunker of elite opinion that never has to dirty itself with reality.
All that is being generated by the current funding model is The Spin-off sharing their content with RNZ/Stuff/TVNZ etc etc etc. An endless social engineering campaign that promotes diversity over white cis male facts.
What we need is NZ on Air ‘Read between the Flags’ Kiwi journalism
In a world of disinformation, we need journalism we can trust. We all get the ‘swim between the flag’ model of surf life saving, NZ on Air should be given extra funding for ‘Read between the flags’ Kiwi Journalism. This money is to ensure plurality of voice for independent media, Māori media, specific communities, news blogs and mainstream news media who become eligible if they agree to a set of Journalistic Principles.
These Journalistic Principles are fact checking stories, attempting to get comment and providing right of replies, protecting sources and attempts to hear the other side of the story.
If you do agree and sign up and can show a body of work that proves your journalism, you are entitled to funding and must have a Kiwi Journalism flag on your site to show you are obliged to follow the Journalistic Principles Code of conduct.
You would have an awareness campaign to urge NZers to ‘read between the flags’ for trusted information.
You can’t control the narrative by simply censoring it the way the Disinformation Project wants, and a ‘read between the flags’ campaign alongside a journalism fund would ensure Kiwis knew that whatever they were reading is at least base line journalistic standards rather than so much of the bullshit opinion masquerading as journalism.
We need to adapt our funding model if we want to have a media that can change to the realities of disinformation and misinformation while championing the importance of the values of journalism.
All NZ on Air funded journalism is now is an extension of elite opinion echo bunkers that only reinforces the privilege rather than challenges it.
What we are instead getting is an Orwellian Wellington Woke Bureaucratic Panzer that will crush anyone who the partisan activists turn it against.
We don’t need a Ministry of truth, we need better funded Fourth Estate Journalism funded by the State with a clear set of journalistic standards and a public campaign warning Kiwis to ‘read within the flags’.
We need smarter ideas, not a Ministry of Truth and not more Tech Karen’s.
Here’s the funny thing, while our side is in power, the Wokies scream for power to strangle free speech, the millisecond the Government changes, watch the Wokies scream the other way.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media
Ha ha Martyn you do have a turn of phrase – “Tech-Karen” Brilliant! Obviously there are deep concerns around the censoring of online debate and investigation. If I, as a pleb unmodified by qualifications, status or buying power, were to make a claim running contrary to the established narrative, at least the narrative entrenched by establishment mouthpieces, all bought and sold by a so called ‘government’ (which they are not so much) but which actually happened to be true, would I be allowed a voice? or would criticism/questioning of the established narrative lead to sanctioning, ridicule and denial of service?
As for comparing online porn with the current education syllabus for young children, teaching them how to use butt plugs & give blow jobs, the disinformation handout seems kind of vacuous:”adult content that children can access,” isn’t that kind of shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted?
The government cant even build a hospital let alone a national security ragime for a good reason. That reason is there are to many woman in education. Name one invention woman have created since education and medicine took on so many females. Its birth control. Forgot her name but it was an American woman who patented a process for producing birth control so that woman can have sex with no consequences.
Most of our high networth females got the wealth through marketing, inheritance but mostly through devorce. They dont build anything. Turns out having an overabundance of female entrepreneurs and teachers make for terrible carpenters, plumbers, electricians etc and we sit around going oh its Labours fault we can’t build a hundred thousand homes or hospitals or a bloody Air Force Combat wing.
Helen Clark, a great New Zealand feminist put her career before family and promptly set about destroying the family unit. She had no idea how to build anything but PR driven bureaucratic nightmares. When ever something came up shed always have a sob story about some poor sod woth some phantom illness thats dis/misinformation. Jacinda was none of that.
I think its obvious. We have an over abundance of feminine men and overweight, childless and single and or all of the above females trying to turn everyone else into the infants that they never had.
A crackdown on dissent, so that everything will be like ultra-censored Zuckerbergville, instead of Free Twitterland?
The Straussians and Brzezinskyites at Neo-Con H.Q. are cooking up the coming war on China (and boots-on-the-ground in Ukraine?) — so you’d better get that wartime censorship ready! (“You’re anti-war? You’re a racist!”)
And we couldn’t possibly allow a local Trump or Bernie or R.F.K. Jr. to start winning office either, now could we? How else can we prevent voters reading about what the F.B.I. found on Hunter Biden’s laptop, and somehow force Elon Musk to print evidence-free declarations about how the evil Russians must have “made it all up”?
If nothing else this will drive me to vote for Nact. If we don’t have free speech, we have nothing
All roads lead to one outcome – censorship. Why the need for blanket censorship should be the question. My answer to this is that there are some heavy handed, largely climate-induced, policies coming down the pike, that will turn the way we live, upside down and then some. The level of opposition to this will need to be quelled, hence growing censorship.
Need to focus firstly on content that is illegal (child porn, violence, threats, theft) and then decide on content which is deeply disturbing (such as the mainstream media’s racism, promotion of war and journalism for hire). The former is concentrated on the dark web and in the deep recesses of social media companies. It might be impossible to eliminate every anonymized node creating/distributing this content without controlling all online data exchange from every server; monitoring billions of end users would be easier but who wants that. The latter tends to be state sponsored terrorism designed to distort facts, create a narrative and sell products for their masters. This ‘Ministry of Truth’ content is even more insidious because it is based on manipulating people and their trust while basically obscuring the hypocrisy that the elites and their bag men can be as wretched as anyone.
Ethan Woke Yes, extremely insidious. With the MSM now largely government controlled, control of the electronic media was inevitable. Unfortunately for New Zealanders, the shocking Muslim massacre provided Ardern with the excuse which she needed to advocate for global censorship of free speech to the UNO. JKT rightly writes here about enabling society to debate, but this is far from what they want, and the concomitant dumbing down of the education system is part of this continuum of political control and manipulation of knowledge, both of which are inimical to a healthy and democratic society.
What is a Tor browser & does anyone know what a VPN is for? Asking for a friend.
Ministry of Truth may be one of the first department s to face cuts under next administration.
Without the resources, they won’t be able to monitor free speech.
So the next administration outsources it instead to the private sector in some kind of PPP arrangement. Problem solved.
Comments are closed.