The consequences of fighting fake news
In an effort to stop the spread of fake news, legitimate stories may be suffering in the process.
To stem the rising influence of fake news, some countries have made the creation and distribution of deliberately false information a crime.
Singapore is the latest country to have passed a law against fake news, joining others like Germany, Malaysia, France and Russia.
But using the law to fight the wave of fake news may not be the best approach. Human rights activists, legal experts and others fear these laws have the potential to be misused to stifle free speech, or unintentionally block legitimate online posts and websites.
Andrew Bolt has spent years at the forefront of what he seems to be apologising for and questioning on his blog site today in an effort for subs. However, these are only intro's to the articles of others that seem to make out that he was never a leading participant in making sexist and misogynistic calls against our PM Julia Gillard.
Bolt regularly made sarcastic remarks against Gillard and her partner and in some way was always dismissive of women he called "frightbats". Is he really defending himself with these intros? The number of times he dissed Bob Brown over the years suggests he's ironic? Is he saying he, Alan Jones and other douche bag jocks actually add to the public discourse in media when they play the individual so facetiously rather than any principle? It brought to mind when Bolt got his rocks off laughing at the very idea of a Sudanese Beauty Pageant on the IPA's radio podcast with his son.
Bolt has been one of the loudest voices heard using the term "Teen Gangs" exclusively for Sudanese Australians and regularly ignoring the activities of white Australians misbehaving in public. We should all be suspicious when Andrew Bolt claims what he periodically does is suspiciously"unfair". When it comes to Andrew Bolt Tigers never change their stripes. But then again he's pointing to articles in the Herald Sun not written by him that he's forced to do for News Corp.(ODT)
YES but NO Bolt insisted he was and Indigenous Australian more so than Adam Goodes. Adam Goodes was also declared Australian of the Year. Bolt in fact is none of these and never will be little more than an Australian deplorable. Suggesting Noel Pearson is a contradiction Bolt should look in a mirror and reflect who it is he's looking at.
Singapore is the latest country to have passed a law against fake news, joining others like Germany, Malaysia, France and Russia.
But using the law to fight the wave of fake news may not be the best approach. Human rights activists, legal experts and others fear these laws have the potential to be misused to stifle free speech, or unintentionally block legitimate online posts and websites.
Andrew Bolt has spent years at the forefront of what he seems to be apologising for and questioning on his blog site today in an effort for subs. However, these are only intro's to the articles of others that seem to make out that he was never a leading participant in making sexist and misogynistic calls against our PM Julia Gillard.
Bolt regularly made sarcastic remarks against Gillard and her partner and in some way was always dismissive of women he called "frightbats". Is he really defending himself with these intros? The number of times he dissed Bob Brown over the years suggests he's ironic? Is he saying he, Alan Jones and other douche bag jocks actually add to the public discourse in media when they play the individual so facetiously rather than any principle? It brought to mind when Bolt got his rocks off laughing at the very idea of a Sudanese Beauty Pageant on the IPA's radio podcast with his son.
Bolt has been one of the loudest voices heard using the term "Teen Gangs" exclusively for Sudanese Australians and regularly ignoring the activities of white Australians misbehaving in public. We should all be suspicious when Andrew Bolt claims what he periodically does is suspiciously"unfair". When it comes to Andrew Bolt Tigers never change their stripes. But then again he's pointing to articles in the Herald Sun not written by him that he's forced to do for News Corp.(ODT)
NO BUT YES
YES but NO Bolt insisted he was and Indigenous Australian more so than Adam Goodes. Adam Goodes was also declared Australian of the Year. Bolt in fact is none of these and never will be little more than an Australian deplorable. Suggesting Noel Pearson is a contradiction Bolt should look in a mirror and reflect who it is he's looking at.
Everyone is buying and selling water, yet farmers say they are the biggest losers
As Australia's competition watchdog prepares to study the Murray-Darling Basin's $2 billion water trade, a trip up the river finds irrigators are worried about the market's "unintended" consequences.
Early this century, laws changed so that water could be traded separately to land.
The result allows anyone — corporate investors, superannuation funds, green groups, even celebrities — to buy and sell water.
"I think it set off with good intentions, but like any market, people work out how to bend the rules to take advantage of a system that was never meant to be like that, and certainly we're seeing that in this market in Victoria," he says.
"The amount of pressure this year from costs and water availability, just the mental pressure of being under so much pressure for so long, it's really starting to take its toll," Mr Gill says.
In a wet year, dairy farmers can pay as low as $40 per megalitre for water in northern Victoria.
Today, it is more likely to be $600.
During the last drought, it reached $1,100.
Andrew Bolt's explanation has always been "there's no drought" there is no Climate Change" and the reason water is so expensive "it's not the market trading and hoarding water" "it's Green policies" Lake Alexandrina the example. The man who lives in Melbourne is telling farmers and townsfolk what their problem is and it's all the fault of environmentalists. If he went to any of these areas preaching this he'd be run out of town tar and feathered on the back of a donkey.(ODT)
Early this century, laws changed so that water could be traded separately to land.
The result allows anyone — corporate investors, superannuation funds, green groups, even celebrities — to buy and sell water.
"I think it set off with good intentions, but like any market, people work out how to bend the rules to take advantage of a system that was never meant to be like that, and certainly we're seeing that in this market in Victoria," he says.
"My biggest beef by miles is that non-irrigators can buy water and just hoard it, collect it and short the market of it.With kelpie Sam at his feet, he says there are issues with a lack of transparency about water trading, and farmers who can't keep up with rules that "change all the time".
"The amount of pressure this year from costs and water availability, just the mental pressure of being under so much pressure for so long, it's really starting to take its toll," Mr Gill says.
In a wet year, dairy farmers can pay as low as $40 per megalitre for water in northern Victoria.
Today, it is more likely to be $600.
During the last drought, it reached $1,100.
Water supplies drying up as drought continues to ravage rural Australia.
Across New South Wales and Queensland's southern downs, country towns are approaching day zero, as water supplies dry up in the drought.
Andrew Bolt's explanation has always been "there's no drought" there is no Climate Change" and the reason water is so expensive "it's not the market trading and hoarding water" "it's Green policies" Lake Alexandrina the example. The man who lives in Melbourne is telling farmers and townsfolk what their problem is and it's all the fault of environmentalists. If he went to any of these areas preaching this he'd be run out of town tar and feathered on the back of a donkey.(ODT)
Sanctioned water theft
No comments:
Post a Comment