Pirate Party Australia applauds media organisations and unions for their rejection of the recent attempt by the Attorney-General to impose a regime of self-censorship on the press[1]. This is a great victory for freedom of speech and information over an increasingly autocratic government, and highlights unnoticed ways in which new media is empowering old media in our democracy.
While this is heartening news, there is still the obvious threat: we have a government that yearns for further control over information and desires the means to stifle criticism. There is little doubt that any regulation of media regarding “national security interests” would be abused in order to shield ministers and departments from deserved criticism in almost precisely the same fashion as the Official Secrets Act was used by the United Kingdom’s Scotland Yard to retaliate against The Guardian newspaper for revealing police corruption during Murdoch’s ongoing phone-hacking scandal.
The article also points to an untold story of the benefits and protection that social media offers to traditional media. The Deputy National Security Adviser, Margot McCarthy, says that there might be merit in the approach but that “the likely predominance of ‘new media'” would make such an attempt futile. This provides much hope for the future of informed democracy. The evidence is before us: when WikiLeaks tweeted with claims of censorship, Pirate Parties around the world mirrored it in over forty different jurisdictions. Social media, in particular Twitter, is responsible for providing information to mainstream journalists from within international trouble spots such as Tunisia during the nation’s recent political upheaval.
Censorship schemes, of a sort that have existed before and could easily have been enacted only a few years ago, are denied viability by wide-spread civil opposition. Direct action on the internet by citizens effectively negates any attempt at suppressing alternative or critical views of governments.
Old media and traditional journalism have had their freedom of expression protected in a very real manner through the mass adoption of new media and the practice of “alternative journalism”. This outcome, and the recognition of the scheme’s futility by Prime Ministerial advisors, validates the current generation of netizens and shows that the reactionary scorn and sneers directed by mainly conservative commentators at social media campaigners is undeserved. Netizens who retweet, repost banned YouTube videos and/or like posts by more traditional activists permit the dissemination and publicising of information and can be an effective action that pays real dividends for the preservation of a free society.
“The outcome of this is certainly a positive step forward for democracy, and affirms that the right to a free press will be upheld,” said Mozart Palmer, spokesperson for Pirate Party Australia. “Government does not like transparency – not only does it draw attention what they are doing, it highlights what they are doing wrong. New media opens the way for unrestricted criticism and free information, and mainstream media has a duty and a right to report facts impartially and freely.”
“What we are seeing is a revolution in the way that people see the world. No longer are gatekeepers controlling the information we have access to. The narrow windows through which news was reported in the past are widening as new forms of communication are being embraced, and this is leading to a far more involved democratic system.”
Although the attempt was rejected, legislation or renegotiation of self-censorship cannot be ruled out and Pirate Party Australia urges media organisations to remain cautious and skeptical of government attempts to regulate or control the freedom of press.