Mis/disinformation regulation - benefits, risks, and one big gap

The Communications Legislation Amendment Bill 2023 introduces transparency but lacks protections for free speech.

David Kennedy · Venture Insights13 July 2023Period: July 20234 min read

Last updated 8 June 2026

2023→

Release year of the Communications Legislation Amendment Bill exposure draft

One→

Major gap identified regarding the lack of protection for freedom of speech

Locked

Companies covered:ACMA

Abstract

This report analyses the exposure draft of the Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill 2023. It evaluates the proposed powers for ACMA to impose industry codes and mandatory standards on digital platforms. While the bill aims to bring transparency to opaque content moderation processes, it faces significant risks regarding institutional credibility and the potential for overzealous suppression of legitimate debate. The analysis suggests a need for symmetrical regulation that protects freedom of speech as rigorously as it targets misinformation.

Key Takeaways

The 2023 exposure draft for mis/disinformation regulation aims to increase transparency in how digital platforms manage content.
ACMA will receive extensive information-gathering and record-keeping powers to monitor platform influence on contentious debates.
A significant risk exists that the Federal Government will be viewed as an arbiter of truth, potentially damaging institutional credibility.

stakeholder implications · PDF download

Frequently Asked Questions

The 2023 exposure draft grants ACMA extensive information-gathering and record-keeping powers to monitor how platforms manage content. This includes the authority to impose mandatory industry codes and standards if self-regulation is deemed insufficient.

There is a high risk to institutional credibility if platforms are viewed as government-sanctioned arbiters of truth. Furthermore, the one major gap in the current bill—a lack of protection for freedom of speech—could lead to legal and reputational blowback from overzealous content suppression.

The analysis identifies that current models monetising clicks drive a significant share of misinformation, making these revenue streams a target for regulatory transparency. Platforms will be required to reconcile these incentives with new requirements for transparent appeal processes for blocked content.

Mis/disinformation regulation - benefits, risks, and one big gap

Abstract

Key Takeaways

Frequently Asked Questions

Unlock the full report

Free

Lite

Team