Voice Referendum Censorship

The words ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ have become so commonplace that they are essentially meaningless. The word ‘misinformation’ now simply means an opinion that the powers that be disagree with.

In the Voice referendum, the “yes” camp likes to assert that opposition is rife with misinformation. Anthony Albanese has alleged that it peddles conspiracy theories.

This is seeping into supposed fact checks, resulting in censorship.

This has reached a crescendo with a recent incident involving Peta Credlin, Facebook, and an ABC/RMIT fact check. This involved Peta Credlin’s coverage of the Uluru statement. Peta Credlin stated that the Uluru statement is more than one page.

Facebook slapped a ‘false’ information warning on Peta Credlin’s interview. This was based on a supposed factcheck by RMIT and ABC. The problem is that the fact check itself was incorrect. One might say it was even misinformation.

Sky news published an expose about this. In that expose they highlight precisely why the RMIT/ABC are wrong. The fact check itself appears to be misinformation. Even ABC media watch called out the fact checkers. ABC Media Watch is hardly known for being right leaning. But, other parts of the ABC are still pushing ahead with censorship, with an edict to journalists to dismiss claims that the Uluru statement is more than one page and quickly move past the topic. In so doing, they neatly avoid any opportunity to push back.

This is a major problem because there is ample evidence that the Uluru statement is either directly or indirectly more than one page. On several occasions Megan Davis – the Uluru Dialogue co-chair - has stated that the Uluru statement is more than one page:

• 2018 Parkes Oration: "The Uluru Statement from the Heart isn’t just the first one-page statement; it’s actually a very lengthy document of about 18 to 20 pages, and a very powerful part of this document reflects what happened in the dialogues."

• 2022 article in The Australian: "The Uluru Statement… is occasionally mistaken as merely a one-page document… in totality (it) is closer to 18 pages and includes… a lengthy narrative called 'Our Story'".

• Webinar for the Australian Institute in August 2022: "It's actually like 18 pages, the Uluru Statement. People only read the first"

• Sydney Peace Prize award ceremony: "It's very important for Australians to read the statement, and the statement is also much bigger it's actually 18 Pages"

Even if we assume that Megan Davis’s views have evolved, those were her statements at the time and one would be forgiven for relying on them to understand how long the Voice was. And either she was incorrect as recently as late 2022 or she is incorrect now.

The One page summary is also so vague that it requires definition. Even if we accept that the Uluru statement is one page long, it contains many vague and broad terms that require additional context. For example, the one page summary calls for a “makarrata” (or treaty). But, the one page does not define what is a treaty or what its goals would be. To understand the one page, we need additional information. Therefore, the background documents are tautologically core to understanding the one page; and thus, for part of it.

The question is then: who will fact check the fact checkers? Big tech does not seem to be up to the job. For now, YouTube is allowing dissenting voices. But, the government is attempting to change that with its ‘misinformation’ Bill. Elon Musk has decried the censorship and purported factcheck. However, this appears more to opportunistically criticize facebook.

Anthony Albanese – who noted that he would like to ban social media – and who is championing a bill to suppress ‘misinformation’ certainly is heading in that direction.  

For now, people must reject falsehoods when they see it. Polling has manifestly turned against the Voice. Over time, there is less to fear from calling out falsehoods from the “yes” campaign. Even if the voice is defeated, it shows us what to expect from the ALP and Albanese at the next election. It would be brave to trust anything the government says about any of their policies from hereon.