Australian Lawmakers Propose Outlawing Parody, Having A Sense Of Humor
from the no-lol dept
There is nothing more dangerous than a government without a sense of humor. This is true for a myriad of reasons, but chief among them must be that a government unable to incorporate humor into its ethos is all the more likely to attempt to outlaw forms of humor held dear by the general public. To see an example of this in action, we can look to Australia and its strange battle against Juice Media, makers of the series Honest Government Adverts, such as the one they did on Australia.
Those of you who haven't been hit in the head with a hammer recently likely noticed that the Australian shield on display on that clearly satirical video is slightly off in that it doesn't spell "Australian" correctly. Hammer attacks or not, if that was the only clue you had that this video is pure and brilliant satire, you need immediate help from healthcare professionals. And, yet, despite all of that, the National Symbols Officer of Australia, which is apparently a real thing, has begun banging its drums over the various laws it claims using that satirical symbol violates. Via the EFF post:
It is unfortunate that the Australian government cannot distinguish between impersonation and satire. But it is especially worrying because the government has proposed legislation that would impose jail terms for impersonation of a government agency. Some laws against impersonating government officials can be appropriate (Australia, like the U.S., is seeing telephone scams from fraudsters claiming to be tax officials). But the proposed legislation in Australia lacks sufficient safeguards. Moreover, the recent letter to Juice Media shows that the government may lack the judgment needed to apply the law fairly.
The legislation in question takes bad legislation to horrific levels. For example, while a 2 year jail sentence is the proposed punishment for anyone impersonating a government agency, there are no provisions within the law involving the violation to be one that is intentionally deceiving. And, while the proposed law does make room for uses that are "solely for genuine satire", that word "genuine" is doing a lot of heavy-lifting to allow the Australian government to be the arbiters of what is truly satire and what isn't. That's territory ripe for misuse and is the reason why our own First Amendment doesn't include such qualifiers. Also, given that the Australian government is already issuing threats to Juice Media, it seems clear that government isn't well-suited to the work this legislation would make for it.
And, in case you were wondering, yes, Juice Media has already responded with another "honest advert":
Slow clap.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: ads, australia, censorship, honest government adverts, satire, thin skin
Companies: juice media
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
The problem with satire...
So it is important to make satirical features endowed with almost-governmental insignia illegal and thus struck off the record. Otherwise 20 years from now nobody will be able to tell the difference and history will be a mess.
Actually, history might be more consistent if you only keep the satirical broadcasts and prohibit the rest.
But at any rate, keeping both is confusing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The problem with satire...
And to add to your point, we might as well ban all forms of fiction. In a couple of hundred years after the robot apocalypse finally dies down, our predecessors will have a hell of a time distinguishing actual events like World War II and The Hunger Games.
I think the government spends too much time making 'for the children'. We need to invigorate efforts 'for the posterity!'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The problem with satire...
Because if you are on drugs, it is advisable for you to stop.
Just say no.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: The problem with satire...
See what I mean?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: The problem with satire...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The problem with satire...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The problem with satire...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQKjj_FDI_M
Might just be an Australian thing, though.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The only not cooked brains are the Aborigines. Of course, they are also hunted by the cooked brains.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emu_War
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hell yeah, its impersonation !
When all is said and done isn't making thing less great the trademark of what most governements agency are doing lately ?
...wait no, do that mean i might end up in prison for this ?!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08T-YsXRcCo
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Attempting to ban, regulate, or in any way restrict satire is antithetical to a free society, and should be grounds for being given a cigarette and a sunny wall to stand next to.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Speech and action are not equivalent, and never will be. Action can deserve the consequences of law. Speech never should.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Almost no one saw the videos before the AUS govt complained - the Bight video had only 24 thousand views.
Now everyone is going to see it.
I just love the Streisand effect.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ha h aha...
Remember folks... don't forget to act 'outraged' and go ahead and do nothing! You don't want to be left behind by the other nations
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdxNk6ALtJI
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dropbears and drongos
Honestly, with these galahs in charge, who NEEDS parody? If John Clarke was still with us, he'd make absolute mincemeat of these stupid proposals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dropbears and drongos
This smells like the work of racists (and badly). Case in point: nazi stooge Hans Globke co-authored the Nuremberg laws. In post-war Germany, he was responsible for the law which is still in use today and which defines who may call themselves German... according to that law it is restricted to those with German inheritance.
We need to steer away from these deep and troubled waters and therefore reject the sentiment that inheritance alone makes citizenship. IMO citizenship should just be card that you can draw from a vending machine after a year or so staying in the country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Dropbears and drongos
The Governor-General and the Queen/King can be from another country and not an Australian citizen at all because us colonial convicts just can't do those jobs properly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Dropbears and drongos
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sense of what?
"No ma'am, we're from the government, we do not have a sense of humor we're aware of."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Censoring?
... but the video ends with "Great Australian Bight, Home to our next great fuck-up" without any *beep*.
Is that intentional? Or just their own fuck-up? I suspect intentional.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Censoring?
Words not beeped:
wankers, shitloads, rooted, fuck.
The only word beeped that I noticed was cunt.
Maybe they (or someone - youtube policy?) drew a line there?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Nawww, those words weren't cursing…
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Multiple cases have stated that speech is not protected and others have stated the exact opposite. eg: No right to protest unless 'authorised' by local govt agency; distinguished byu "calling Tony Abbot.. our ex Prime Minister..'a cunt' is quite ok" (Though that wasnt a federal ruling and state based.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Firstly, they changed the logo in the follow up video to replace the heads of the kangaroo and emu with surveillance cameras (which is a nice touch). So, their parady of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms (which is what the Australian Office of the Prime Minister and Cabinet[1] calls the original) has changed.
Many people note the "mispelling" of Australian as Australien, but I have yet to see anyone note that Juice have also replaced the seven pointed star[2] which sits atop the origin with the styled head of an extra-terrestrial.
Hence, Austr-Alien.
I assume that the National Symbols Officer of Australia missed that little hint too. Perhaps the Officer is an extraterrestrial dual-national and is offended?
[1]: https://www.pmc.gov.au/government/commonwealth-coat-arms
[2]: Seven points because, originally, New Zealand was to be the seventh state. So, thats worth replacing because it is inaccurate :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Juice Media obviously don't do that. I mean, if it's not obvious to you, they you aren't capable of writing and enforcing laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]