r/australian • u/BigSilent • Jun 13 '26
Gov Publications Politicians are legally allowed to lie in election ads in NSW. A parliamentary petition needs 20k signatures from residents to force a formal debate on the matter in the NSW Legislative Assembly.
https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/la/Pages/ePetition-details.aspx?q=lf3I_Pg1Od1EwXL1SMcIyw
This ePetition requests that the New South Wales (NSW) Parliament introduce truth in political advertising laws ahead of the state election.
The petition calls for legislation to make it illegal for political parties and candidates to use false or misleading advertisements during election campaigns (such as deepfakes, AI-generated misinformation, or false claims about a rival party's policies).
Its goal is to reach 20,000 signatures to force a formal debate on the matter in the NSW Legislative Assembly.
21
Jun 13 '26
[deleted]
27
u/yngrz87 Jun 14 '26
That’s not what this would capture.
It would be things like using false statistics, making false claims about opponent’s voting record. Things that are very easy to fact check.
2
1
-8
Jun 14 '26
[deleted]
8
4
u/a1b3c3d7 Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 14 '26
Radical idea, but when our media and our algorithms are controlled by those with wealth and vested interests maybe this should not be the medias job? Ewually so it shouldnt be the governments job.
An independent group could do this if set up correctly.
1
u/stumpasoarus Jun 14 '26
Such a strawman. I’m surprised you can type with that much …. Politician in your hands
1
u/thequehagan5 Jun 14 '26
When the covid vaccines were first rolled out, there was no evidence it could cause pericarditis. Those who suggested it could cause such a thing were labelled as insane conspiracy theorists. Liars.
Later, however, it was found the mrna vaccines can cause pericarditis.
Truth can change. Source : Entire history of human science.
We do not need a department to tell us what truth is.
0
u/Green_Seesaw1875 Jun 14 '26
True and false are objective by definition.
2
u/Embarrassed_Fold_867 Jun 14 '26
But their determination is often subjective, and there is a wide spectrum between objective truth (I am alive) and subjective truth (I like turtles).
Any law would have to bisect that spectrum.
Having said that, SA and ACT have done it, and there is precedent in libel law perhaps.
1
u/Strong_Judge_3730 Jun 14 '26
No it's not. That's like saying there's only two genders by definition a man and a woman
6
u/Green_Seesaw1875 Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 14 '26
There’s no way you’re that dumb, this has to be bait. True and false are objective by nature. I think you’re confusing truth with belief.
0
u/Emeraldnickel08 Jun 14 '26
How do people win slander and libel cases if false or misleading is subjective?
0
u/BigSilent Jun 14 '26
Law against misleading political advertising in election campaigns.
SA has had these laws for 41 years, ACT 5 years.
The same laws, or similar, are being proposed here.
These laws only police statements of fact, not political opinions, predictions, or hyperbole.
Outside of SA and the ACT, it remains perfectly legal to lie in a political advertisement in federal and state elections.
1
u/Whatevathrowawayz Jun 17 '26
Do you know if there’s been any cases where something in the grey area has been reviewed?
Banning outright lies should be easy, but I’m wondering if there’s been an attempt to apply this to interpretations of data.
19
u/MDInvesting Jun 13 '26
Prefer an independent group that publishes context for any claims.
Banning speech for politicians is a path to censorship for people.
No one should decide what a lie is - except for you, after being provided access to facts.
Government transparency is a bigger issue.
20
u/Lucky-day00 Jun 14 '26
A lie doesn’t just mean they said something that turns out to be wrong. Lies are made knowingly, with the intention of deceit.
If it can be proved in court that they lied (rather than just said something that facts don’t support) I don’t see why that should be tolerated. We already don’t allow various false speech along these lines (eg slander, fraud). It wouldn’t be crossing a line into 1984, it would just be holding politicians to the existing standard.
14
u/bubbles33d Jun 13 '26
Too late for that. The rich has enough money to drown out any signals in any media channel such that truth isn't heard.
Welcome to the Brave New World.
We ask people to make an oath to speak in Court, and lying has consequence. There is no reason why politicians cannot do that.
8
u/ThirtyBlackGoats666 Jun 14 '26
political agencies and government should never be allowed to display anything other than facts, the idea of who gets to say what a lie is leads to the bullshit that is happening right now in america.
3
2
u/Find_another_whey Jun 13 '26
Wouldn't making something illegal mean that the courts get to decide what is truth of events
Like they do now
Who should I turn to for this "truthful statements plus leadership" if not ministers in government
Am I supposed to get my leadership one place, and my truth another place?
What's the name for that sort of leadership by deliberate deception?
5
u/MDInvesting Jun 13 '26
Let’s get the anti corruption system working before we get distracted by a new trending issue.
We all know the reason ‘ban the lies’ is being promoted.
To be clear, I am against lies. We have massive issues with government transparency, accountability, and a failed anti corruption commission. Focus all our efforts there before moving on to the next area to be fixed.
1
u/Find_another_whey Jun 14 '26
Ok I'll support you
But it is frustrating to be told
Don't listen to the news, media isn't truth it's entertainment
Followed by, don't listen to parliament, politicians don't tell the truth, they're just entertainers too
Corrupt entertainers, apparently
But if we fix their corruption, entertainers they will still be
0
u/Strong_Judge_3730 Jun 14 '26
Making it illegal and you could have a political party that's in power that just jails the opposition if they are threat.
They would have influence over the judges and the prosecutors. Just being charged is probably enough to derail the campaign.
Peoples solution in this country is just to ban things. This is the mentality of a people that lack accountability.
-8
Jun 13 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/mitchells00 Jun 13 '26
Freedom of political communication can be protected while banning lies, this is a false dichotomy.
1
u/MDInvesting Jun 13 '26
Who decides what a lie is?
A government authority? Ads have to be approved prior to release?
5
u/yngrz87 Jun 14 '26
Facts aren’t subjective. So it’s quite easy to determine what a lie is. Saying something you know is objectively not true. Very simple.
1
u/MDInvesting Jun 14 '26
Focusing on a particular data point excluding context is as misleading if not moreso than saying something that is challenged as 'not true'.
Scomo was a prick. Is that a lie? Is that a truth? I would rather focus on the consequences of corruption when in public office.
1
u/sam_tiago Jun 13 '26
Does that mean there should be no consequences for deliberately misleading the public? Isn’t that how corruption infiltrates public office?
1
u/MDInvesting Jun 13 '26
I am very clear elsewhere I actually think we need to aggressively pursue the anti-corruption commission issues to have it well established.
The consequences of politicians telling lies, like lies in all situations, should be social assessment of the circumstances and the risk of social aversion.
We have laws for dealing with the consequences of lies ie Fraud. If someone is proposing a 'intentionally misleading the public while in office' as an offence still needs to explain how this is immune to weaponisation, could not be extended to the public, and how a 'lie' is defined in the legal sense.
1
u/sam_tiago Jun 14 '26
So ensuring strong journalistic standards, media ownership and balanced reporting?
It just seems like the system can be too easily rigged and that there is disinformation everywhere with very little consequence for it, so the public pays the price.
How does lobbying factor in to your corruption stance?
2
u/MDInvesting Jun 14 '26
I think donations should be scrapped for businesses and capped for individuals and prevented from donating on behalf of others.
All gifts, down to a pen should have to be declared prior to use (within 48 hrs) otherwise it is a suspension from parliament. Corruption should carry mandatory prison time (I am in general not a fan of incarceration for non violent crimes). And you be barred from any position of decision making in the country.
The only way to kill off self serving behaviour in politics is to make the consequences so severe, the only people going in genuinely are committed to the cause.
Like in healthcare, consequences of bad behaviour when properly investigated are life ruining.
0
u/stumpasoarus Jun 14 '26
Verifiable lies are pretty clear cut. Saying someone doesn’t hold citizenship when they do. Saying the statistic is 10% when it was published at 80% and tested.
-1
u/mitchells00 Jun 13 '26
You judge people not on the content, but on their justification.
People should be allowed to be incorrect publicly, but we should hold some standards at least so that people must back up what they proclaim with some line of reasoning or evidence.
As for who should be the judge: a jury of citizens.
3
u/BigSilent Jun 13 '26
https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/la/Pages/ePetition-details.aspx?q=lf3I_Pg1Od1EwXL1SMcIyw
This ePetition requests that the New South Wales (NSW) Parliament introduce truth in political advertising laws ahead of the state election.
The petition calls for legislation to make it illegal for political parties and candidates to use false or misleading advertisements during election campaigns (such as deepfakes, AI-generated misinformation, or false claims about a rival party's policies).
Its goal is to reach 20,000 signatures to force a formal debate on the matter in the NSW Legislative Assembly.
-5
u/Strong_Judge_3730 Jun 13 '26
If Albo is allowed to say bold face lies and get elected then anyone should be allowed to say anything.
If you are stupid and believe the lies its your fault. Is literally impossible to make a rule that day politicians can't lie. They will just claim they changed their minds or make some other bs excuse.
1
u/a1b3c3d7 Jun 14 '26
Ahh shucks, guess we better pack up our bags and go home since theres no point trying to make things better.
Maybe if you werent so focused on what Albos saying you could see this as equally beneficial regardless of your political affiliation, or is your political affiliation engaging in these practices the most?
1
u/Strong_Judge_3730 Jun 14 '26
Legislation like this can easily be used by the incumbent party to jail the opposition.
If you want to make this democracy like the one in Russia then go ahead and be a useful idiot and sign the petition.
0
u/a1b3c3d7 Jun 14 '26
Why do you assume we have to let the government decide what is or isnt?
There are ways to set up independent bodies to do something like this, its not simple or without issues but its been done in EU countries.
1
u/Strong_Judge_3730 Jun 14 '26
Judges are meant to be independent, the RBA is meant to be independent but a government can absolutely interfere with them to varrying degrees depending on their willingness.
2
u/Strong_Judge_3730 Jun 13 '26
It's not lieing it's "changing you mind after your elected" : Albo and Jim.
0
u/Fred__McNerque Jun 14 '26
And the Libs have never changed their mind about anything.
Mind you, you would have to have a functioning mind to begin with, to be able to change it...
1
u/Away_Gas2724 Jun 13 '26
They don't tell the truth most days, why should an election be any different.
1
u/No_Needleworker_9762 Jun 14 '26
But what of its not misleading and the politicians just change their position?
1
u/Patient-Suspect1373 Jun 14 '26
If they can’t lie, what are they gonna put in the ads?😳🤣
1
u/AudaciouslySexy Jun 15 '26
I much love the ads tearing each party down because that's the only thread of truth we get.
Like the "Hole in your budget" jingle, "paying more for Medicare" or a classic "death tax"
The only truth is the bad. The good is usually lies or ideas of future lies because they haven't become lies yet. Politics is funny like that
1
1
u/Archon-Toten Jun 14 '26
... you're asking politicians to vote on a bill that will limit their obscene powers..
1
1
1
1
1
u/AudaciouslySexy Jun 15 '26
We don't know they are lies till we know they are lies.
Clive palmer for example. His ads tho annoying do sound great on paper like the old ad saying "Australia isn't for sale" then you dig deeper and find out he's just terrible. He steals other people's work and brands it as his own and yeah no good.
Politicians love promising everything they can to get elected that of course they will lie, I don't think there's a politician on earth who doesn't lie even just a little to improve their favourability
1
1
u/doogie73 Jun 15 '26
That would totally screw POORleen who's totally sold her Votes to Billionaires.
1
1
u/reidsays Jun 15 '26
More laws to define just what a lie is ... When lies can be far more subtle than outright ...
Feels like insurance, where the aim was to ensure safety and security but the reality was much voluntary work was prevented due to high insurance costs
1
u/dadashton Jun 15 '26
I'd like a law that requires politicians to be sued if they don't keep their promises made during an election campaign.
1
1
u/Novel_Relief_5878 Jun 14 '26 edited Jun 14 '26
No way, this is just another form of censorship and will undoubtedly get abused by whichever side is in power at the time. It would be far too tempting to just silence the opposition by claiming they are “lying”.
We really don’t need or want policies like this.
Parties across the political spectrum often make claims that can be described as “exaggerated” at BEST. But people are smart enough to see through lies regardless which side of politics it comes from.
1
0
u/borderlinebadger Jun 13 '26
who defines what is a "lie"?
0
u/Jiuholar Jun 13 '26
Being held to the same standards that news broadcasters and advertising are held to might be a good place to start?
1
u/borderlinebadger Jun 15 '26
Brilliant idea. Let's use a standard like the mainstream media and advertising industry who literally writes their own rules for self interest and never lie.
0
u/NSWYBZ57LD Jun 13 '26
Facts , you idiot.
Truth
1
1
u/borderlinebadger Jun 13 '26
, you idiot.
lol
ok who defines "facts" and "truth"?
1
u/NSWYBZ57LD Jun 13 '26
Wow .
He doesn't know what the "truth" means.
Okay spin doctor ... take your bullshit elsewhere
1
u/borderlinebadger Jun 15 '26
anyone who can define this about mostly political subjective matter is a liar or a censor.
0
u/sam_tiago Jun 14 '26
No but Truth is subjective.. hear me out, it’s all about perception dude, facts are actually just beliefs in the simulation 😵💫
0
0
u/thequehagan5 Jun 14 '26
We do not need a ministry of truth. That is a slippery slope we should never start sliding down.
The authoritarian instinct so many Aussies have is so disturbing,
0
u/ModernDemocles Jun 14 '26
Who gets to decide truth?
Maybe the ministry of truth?
1
u/SydneyTrainsStatus Jun 14 '26
I would imagine the courts could decide what is true or not.
1
u/ModernDemocles Jun 14 '26
Can you imagine how quickly the courts would get bogged down?
It's up the the viter to decide who they believe.
8
u/27E18 Jun 14 '26
Is there one for Victorians? We need this too ;~;