SA Labor losing the plot

[Gozu]

Both the Labor party & Liberal party should hang their heads in shame for passing yet another draconian law.

"Labor Gags Internet Debate":

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 01,00.html

[southee]

Oh dear me!!!

Gozu, I can't comment on this......but really. What a load of s**t!!! (Good to see you even admit this!!)

The death nail in FootySA's great politic forum???

I did not know we lived in China

This will definately cost Labour votes!!!!!

Please note :Name and address withheld

[Psyber]

While it sounds draconian, it may not be as unreasonable as it first sounds if it applies only for the short time between the issue of writs and the actual poll.
It would tend to curb the extreme social subversives, right and left, and cut the costs to the parties of keeping their own paid propagandists on duty 24/7...

The law will apply as soon as the writs for the March 20 election are issued. The writs for the election can be issued any time between now and 25 days before the election.
The law will then lapse at 6pm on polling day.

But, I'm glad the yahoo based email address I use every time I make public comment points to a totally fictitious person at a totally fictitious address.
The site can hand over my details on record without any concern that it is doing me a disservice, or that the local KGB equivalent will whisk me off to a camp somewhere, without having to do some major work to find me...

[Wedgie]

Terrible law. Going to have to think how we'll enforce it on here. Probably easiest just to close down the Politics forum temporarily. That will give the pollies what they want. One of many steps governments in this country are looking at, might have to move to Russia soon to have free speech!

[Jimmy_041]

While it sounds draconian, it may not be as unreasonable as it first sounds if it applies only for the short time between the issue of writs and the actual poll.
It would tend to curb the extreme social subversives, right and left, and cut the costs to the parties of keeping their own paid propagandists on duty 24/7...

The law will apply as soon as the writs for the March 20 election are issued. The writs for the election can be issued any time between now and 25 days before the election.
The law will then lapse at 6pm on polling day.

But, I'm glad the yahoo based email address I use every time I make public comment points to a totally fictitious person at a totally fictitious address.
The site can hand over my details on record without any concern that it is doing me a disservice, or that the local KGB equivalent will whisk me off to a camp somewhere, without having to do some major work to find me...

Half the people on here probably want it to shut Gozu and me up

Jimmy_041
5041

[mick]

A very dark day for freedom of speech and democracy. This together with Rann's anti-association laws is another step in the wrong direction. The Boring Beige Beaurocrat in Canberra is into censorship as well, one wonders what the future holds.

[Psyber]

I think all politicians are fundamentally into control, control of anything and everything...
It really strokes the ego.

I used to like the graffito that said, "Don't vote, it only encourages them!"

[redandblack]

Sometimes it's not a bad idea to have some idea of the legislation before you start calling the end of the world.

Firstly, Psyber is quite correct. (don't quote me as your new signature, Psyber )

Secondly, it doesn't apply, as far as I know, to sites other than newspaper blog sites), by extending the existing laws to those sites.

Thirdly, as Gozu pointed out, it was passed with both parties support, after consultation with the State Electoral Commission.

Fourthly, good to see Southee not going over the top for a change

Lastly, if it ever applied to this forum, I wouldn't comply.

[Wedgie]

R&b, can you point out where details of the legislation can be viewed please?
If it's only selected websites then that would make the law even worse IMHO as it would be discrimatory.

PS I can assure you that you would comply as the politics forum would be closed.

[Booney]

R&b, can you point out where details of the legislation can be viewed please?
If it's only selected websites then that would make the law even worse IMHO as it would be discrimatory.

PS I can assure you that you would comply as the politics forum would be closed.

LOL - "The propsed laws are only available on selected sites that have a restricted viewing audience"

[redandblack]

Not sure where it can be viewed specifically, but I have no doubt your local MP could point you to it. Otherwise Hansard or the Govt Gazette.

I listened io the Attorney General and the Liberal spokesperson on 891 this morning and it was clear that it related only to newspapers as it always hasw. It's extended to newspaper blog sites only, as an extension of newspapers, although whether it extends to radio blog sites is arguable.

In any event, I think it's bad legislation. If you shut down the Politics Forum, it would only need to be for the duration of the election campaign. I'll keep an eye on the other main political blogs and see what they do.

I can assure you that closing the Politics Forum would only mean that I had no choice about complying. If I had a choice, I wouldn't comply.

[Squawk]

R&b, can you point out where details of the legislation can be viewed please?
If it's only selected websites then that would make the law even worse IMHO as it would be discrimatory.

PS I can assure you that you would comply as the politics forum would be closed.

http://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/ELECTORAL%20ACT%201985/CURRENT/1985.77.UN.RTF

See section 116.

The Law only applies once the writs have been issued (ie the election is "called").

[Jimmy_041]

116—Published material to identify person responsible for political content
(1) A person must not, during an election period, publish material consisting of, or containing a commentary on, any candidate or political party, or the issues being submitted to electors, in written form, in a journal published in electronic form on the Internet or by radio or television or broadcast on the Internet, unless the material or the programme in which the material is presented contains a statement of the name and address (not being a post office box) of a person who takes responsibility for the publication of the material.
Maximum penalty:
(a) if the offender is a natural person—$1 250;
(b) if the offender is a body corporate—$5 000.
(2) This section does not apply to—
(a) the publication in a journal (including a journal published in electronic form on the Internet) of a leading article;
(b) the publication of a report of a meeting that does not contain any comment (other than comment made by a speaker at the meeting) on any candidate, or political party, or the issues being submitted to electors;
(c) the publication in a journal (including a journal published in electronic form on the Internet) of an article, letter, report or other matter if—
(i) the name and address (not being a post office box) of a person who takes responsibility for the publication of the material is provided to the publisher of the journal and retained by the publisher for a period of 6 months after the end of the election period; and
(ii) the journal contains a statement of the name and postcode of the person who takes responsibility for the publication of the material;
(ca) the publication of a letter (otherwise than as described in paragraph (c)) that contains the name and address (not being a post office box) of the author of the letter;
(d) a news service or a current affairs programme on radio or television or broadcast on the Internet;
(e) any other prescribed material or class of material.
(3) In this section—
journal means a newspaper, magazine or other periodical.

Jimmy_041
5041

[redandblack]

Welcome back, Jimmy

Thanks for that, the SAFooty Politics Forum can live on through an election campaign, if I read that correctly.

[Wedgie]

Wow, that's shocking and worse than what I first thought but good news for us as I agree with the way r&b read it.

[fisho mcspaz]

Michael Atkinson - Chief of the Thought Police.

[Gozu]

Hendrik Gout with "Democracy, South Australian style":

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/02/02/dem ... ian-twist/

"Michael Atkinson vs The Advertiser":

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/02/02/crikey-says-153/

"Is the SA government censoring free speech online?":

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/02/02/is- ... ch-online/

[fish]

Can anonymous comments made prior to the issue of writs remain on this forum during the campaign?

[fisho mcspaz]

I think we've got until March 20 before the laws come into effect. Even then - how can they police it? I'd go to the UN.

[Squawk]

Can anonymous comments made prior to the issue of writs remain on this forum during the campaign?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/02/2807584.htm

South Australia's Attorney-General has defended tougher laws on political comment made on the internet.

During election periods, anyone posting comment or blogs must publish their real name and postcode.

Michael Atkinson says it has long been a requirement that newspapers verify personal details for letters published during election periods.

He says the new law, which has applied since early last month, ensures the public's right to know.

"[It's really about] the right to know who's making a comment during an election period," he said.

"It will only apply to newspapers and extensions of newspapers.
"All it is ... is a re-formulation of the very old rule which has applied throughout our lifetimes that if in the election period, and only in the election period, if you write a letter to the paper calculated to affect the result of the election then you have to do so under a real name and a real address."

Mr Atkinson says television and radio has always been regulated by the Commonwealth and it is most likely that comment on websites such as the ABC's would fall into that category.