Elon Musk Takes on Australia: Fights ‘Global Content Bans’ to Safeguard Free Speech

Elon is willing to take a big risk for his freedom of speech. He’s prepared to spend $44 billion.

In addition, Musk has ruffled feathers within the Biden administration and among Democrats by challenging their attempts to regulate social media, potentially inviting further scrutiny and increasing the stakes for him.

He’s still able to speak out and challenge what he believes to be an existential danger, like the suppression of social-media speech. He has criticized NPR’s new chief executive officer and announced that he would be launching a First Amendment campaign.

Musk is fighting against an Australian attempt to censor posts on X. These posts were about an attack that authorities have labeled a terrorist. In addition, they also discuss “misinformation” and disinformation with the same claims about having to “protect the public”.

Anthony Albanese is the Australian Prime Minister. His tweet contains this comment:

The relevant part is:

We must acknowledge this, and social media platforms have a duty. In general, people responded appropriately to the directives from the E-Safety Commissioner, yet X chose a different path. It is remarkable that X opted not to comply and is attempting to justify their actions. It is clear that Australians overwhelmingly desire an end to misinformation and disinformation. This is not an issue of freedom of expression; it is about the harmful consequences that can arise when falsehoods, known to be false by everyone, are disseminated and weaponized to sow discord and, in this instance, to amplify negative sentiments and potentially exacerbate an already challenging situation. Social media platforms bear a social responsibility.

This wonderful article by a Labor politician, who claimed that they were cracking down on crime.

Tanya Plibersek accused Musk of being “egotistical” and trying to dictate the Australian government when it appears that the Australian government is “dictating”.

X claims that the edicts could result in global restrictions on content.

Meta followed the order. X, however, did not. X said that although some posts were removed and “publicly discussed” the recent attack, “they did not violate X rules regarding violent speech.” The company also said that they believed that the order did not fall within Australian law and that the commissioner has no authority to tell X users which content can be viewed globally.

X stated that it complied with the order, but also added that it will “robustly challenge” this illegal and dangerous approach in court. It stated that “global takedowns are against the principles for an open and free Internet and threaten freedom of expression everywhere.”

Musk also condemned the actions.

According to X, if the company fails to comply with the global withholding of posts in question it could be fined up $500,000 per day.

On Monday, the eSafety commissioner was granted a court injunction to compel X to remove posts relating to the attack. According to the commissioner, X’s geoblocking of the content – meaning it would not be accessible to users in Australia – was insufficient for compliance with Australian law. This was because the commissioner argued that the “geoblocking”, which meant the content wouldn’t have been available to Australian users, was not enough to

To comply with the injunction, X must hide certain posts within 24 hours from all users. To accomplish this, X must add a warning before posting. Users cannot remove the warnings.

Musk mocked the Prime Minister’s statement.

When you hear the words “misinformation” and “disinformation”, hold on to your hat. You’re being sold some nonsense.