Australia's online watchdog informed a court on Friday (May 10) that it was seeking worldwide removal of X posts that shows a stabbing of a Christian cleric&nbsp;in Sydney.

The lawyers for the eSafety Commission told the Federal Court that X had not taken all logical steps to eliminate 65 video and audio clips of a knife attack on an Assyrian bishop.&nbsp;

With the authority to take down illegal content like terrorism videos from online platforms, the commission responded to the stabbing by issuing takedown notices to social media companies.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-presidential-polls-wouldnt-have-voted-for-you-because-author-tells-vivek-ramaswamy-he-reacts-719986">Support pours out for Vivek Ramaswamy after US author's 'you're Indian' comment</a>

However, the commission argues that X only restricted access to the videos for Australian users.

Tim Begbie, a commission representative, highlighted that even with X's attempt to block the videos geographically within Australia, they remained accessible through virtual private networks (VPNs) that mask a user's location.

"If, truly, the only step you can take because of how you have set up your systems and policies is global removal, then that is a reasonable step," he said.&nbsp;

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/sydney-church-stabbing-16-year-old-charged-for-allegedly-committing-a-terrorist-act-713054">Sydney church stabbing: 16-year-old charged for allegedly ‘committing a terrorist act’</a>

According to Begbie, while X has policies that allow the global removal of content, it has declined to use them.&nbsp;

"X says that reasonable means what X wants it to mean. Global removal is reasonable because X wants to do it, but it becomes unreasonable when X is told to do it by the laws of Australia."

Begbie said, this is not a proceeding about a free speech policy debate. Rather, the case is about whether the graphic material was suitable under Australia's Online Safety Act, and the law's powers to protect the public from restricted content.

<h2>Sydney church stabbing</h2>

Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel was allegedly slashed in the head and chest by a 16-year-old suspect during an April 15 service.

It was deemed a terrorist incident by police. While the bishop, who has recovered from the attack, has supported the video's distribution.&nbsp;

X's lawyer, Bret Walker, argued in court that the takedown order only restricted access for Australian users. He further emphasised the need for a nuanced approach, questioning whether the stabbing video truly met the criteria for removal.

Also read:&nbsp;<a data-ctorig="https://www.wionews.com/videos/sydney-church-attack-bishop-mar-mari-emmanuel-calls-attacker-his-son-forgives-him-712547" data-cturl="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/videos/sydney-church-attack-bishop-mar-mari-emmanuel-calls-attacker-his-son-forgives-him-712547&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjeyJ6W3YKGAxXVjq8BHcUPCa4QFnoECAkQAg&amp;usg=AOvVaw3J0O5l0Fzs_-tFQyPExVHn&amp;arm=e" dir="ltr" href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/sydney-church-attack-bishop-mar-mari-emmanuel-calls-attacker-his-son-forgives-him-712547" target="_blank">Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel&nbsp;calls attacker his son, forgives him&nbsp;</a>

Walker offered an analogy, comparing the video to a war movie. He explained that violent content doesn't automatically qualify for removal simply because it depicts a killing.

Justice Geoffrey Kennett extended the court's order requiring X to block the attack videos until next week, when the issue of global removal will likely be addressed.

(With inputs from agencies)

Australia's online watchdog informed a court on Friday (May 10) that it was seeking worldwide removal of X posts that shows a stabbing of a Christian cleric in Sydney.

Australia's online watchdog informed a court on Friday (May 10) that it was seeking worldwide removal of X posts that shows a stabbing of a Christian cleric in Sydney. The lawyers for the eSafety Commission told the Federal Court that X had not taken all logical steps to eliminate 65 video and audio clips of a knife attack on an Assyrian bishop. With the authority to take down illegal content like terrorism videos from online platforms, the commission responded to the stabbing by issuing takedown notices to social media companies. Also read: Support pours out for Vivek Ramaswamy after US author's 'you're Indian' comment However, the commission argues that X only restricted access to the videos for Australian users. Tim Begbie, a commission representative, highlighted that even with X's attempt to block the videos geographically within Australia, they remained accessible through virtual private networks (VPNs) that mask a user's location. "If, truly, the only step you can take because of how you have set up your systems and policies is global removal, then that is a reasonable step," he said. Also read: Sydney church stabbing: 16-year-old charged for allegedly ‘committing a terrorist act’ According to Begbie, while X has policies that allow the global removal of content, it has declined to use them. "X says that reasonable means what X wants it to mean. Global removal is reasonable because X wants to do it, but it becomes unreasonable when X is told to do it by the laws of Australia." Begbie said, this is not a proceeding about a free speech policy debate. Rather, the case is about whether the graphic material was suitable under Australia's Online Safety Act, and the law's powers to protect the public from restricted content. Sydney church stabbing Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel was allegedly slashed in the head and chest by a 16-year-old suspect during an April 15 service. It was deemed a terrorist incident by police. While the bishop, who has recovered from the attack, has supported the video's distribution. X's lawyer, Bret Walker, argued in court that the takedown order only restricted access for Australian users. He further emphasised the need for a nuanced approach, questioning whether the stabbing video truly met the criteria for removal. Also read: Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel calls attacker his son, forgives him Walker offered an analogy, comparing the video to a war movie. He explained that violent content doesn't automatically qualify for removal simply because it depicts a killing. Justice Geoffrey Kennett extended the court's order requiring X to block the attack videos until next week, when the issue of global removal will likely be addressed. (With inputs from agencies)

Australian watchdog seeks removal of stabbing video from X worldwide

Australia’s competition regulator on Monday advised to revise its competition laws in the wake of the rapid expansion of digital platforms like Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta and Microsoft in the country.

The reasoning provided by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) behind this announcement was the increasing risk of these platforms being involved in invasive data collection and other practices.&nbsp;

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/study-reveals-humour-is-powerful-tool-to-improve-relationship-quality-over-time-662683">Study reveals humour is powerful tool to improve relationship quality over time</a>

"Our proposed reforms include a call for targeted consumer protections and service-specific codes to prevent anti-competitive conduct by particular designated digital platforms," ACCC Chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said.

<h2>Australian watchdog calls for new competition laws for digital platforms&nbsp;</h2>

ACCC has not made any specific findings of anti-competitive conduct but said digital platforms with significant market power can manipulate it to their benefit.&nbsp;

As per ACCC, these digital platforms can utilise their market hegemony such as the bundling of products, and pre-installation and default settings to limit customer choice or deter innovation from competitors.&nbsp;

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/neanderthals-were-able-to-produce-human-like-speech-claims-study-662800">How did Neanderthals speak? Study points to human-like speech</a>

When it comes to data collection, ACCC found that these providers have greater access to rich consumer data via expansion, which is unfair to other digital platforms For example, Amazon, Apple and Google collect vast amounts of consumer data through smart home devices. It’s not always clear from the relevant privacy policies if the data collected exceeds that which is needed for device functionality or product improvement.

The regulator has also proposed new mandatory obligations on all digital platforms to address scams, harmful apps, and fake reviews, including notice and action requirements and stronger verification of business users and reviews.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/science/installing-solar-panels-more-eco-friendly-than-planting-trees-study-663013">Installing solar panels more eco-friendly than planting trees: Study</a>

The report also considers the role of digital platform providers in developing emerging technologies. The five largest digital platforms, mentioned earlier, are making investments in research and development and buying other smaller companies in areas such as generative AI to ensure they remain in comfortable positions in the developing digital economy.

“The critical role digital platform service providers have in the development of new technologies like artificial intelligence and cloud computing demonstrates their importance to the Australian economy, now and in the future,” Cass-Gottlieb said.

(With inputs from agencies)

Australia’s competition regulator on Monday advised to revise its competition laws in the wake of the rapid expansion of digital platforms like Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta and Microsoft in the country.

Australia’s competition regulator on Monday advised to revise its competition laws in the wake of the rapid expansion of digital platforms like Amazon, Apple, Google, Meta and Microsoft in the country. The reasoning provided by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) behind this announcement was the increasing risk of these platforms being involved in invasive data collection and other practices. Also Read | Study reveals humour is powerful tool to improve relationship quality over time "Our proposed reforms include a call for targeted consumer protections and service-specific codes to prevent anti-competitive conduct by particular designated digital platforms," ACCC Chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb said. Australian watchdog calls for new competition laws for digital platforms ACCC has not made any specific findings of anti-competitive conduct but said digital platforms with significant market power can manipulate it to their benefit. As per ACCC, these digital platforms can utilise their market hegemony such as the bundling of products, and pre-installation and default settings to limit customer choice or deter innovation from competitors. Also Read | How did Neanderthals speak? Study points to human-like speech When it comes to data collection, ACCC found that these providers have greater access to rich consumer data via expansion, which is unfair to other digital platforms For example, Amazon, Apple and Google collect vast amounts of consumer data through smart home devices. It’s not always clear from the relevant privacy policies if the data collected exceeds that which is needed for device functionality or product improvement. The regulator has also proposed new mandatory obligations on all digital platforms to address scams, harmful apps, and fake reviews, including notice and action requirements and stronger verification of business users and reviews. Also Read | Installing solar panels more eco-friendly than planting trees: Study The report also considers the role of digital platform providers in developing emerging technologies. The five largest digital platforms, mentioned earlier, are making investments in research and development and buying other smaller companies in areas such as generative AI to ensure they remain in comfortable positions in the developing digital economy. “The critical role digital platform service providers have in the development of new technologies like artificial intelligence and cloud computing demonstrates their importance to the Australian economy, now and in the future,” Cass-Gottlieb said. (With inputs from agencies)

Australian competition watchdog suggests new laws for digital platforms

Australia’s competition watchdog on Monday recommended a new regulatory body be set up to monitor tech giants <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/facebook-makes-it-compulsory-for-advertisers-to-disclose-their-identity-location-182007">Facebook</a> Inc and Alphabet Inc’s Google and their dominance of the online advertising and news markets.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) said in a preliminary report on the US firms’ market power that extra oversight was justified to ensure advertisers were treated fairly and the public access to news was unfettered.

The report, ordered by the government a year ago, is being closely watched as lawmakers around the world wrestle with the powerful tech firms’ role in public life and their influence on everything from privacy to disinformation and traditional media.

It follows moves by Australia last week to compel tech firms to help security agencies access private user data.

Facebook and Google’s algorithms governing the display of advertisements lacked transparency, the ACCC said in its report, giving the firms “both the ability and incentive to favour their own related businesses” ahead of advertisers’.

Similarly, the companies have usurped traditional publishers as news distributors, which has both hurt incumbent media companies and made it harder for readers to find accurate reports, the regulator found.

“Consumers face a potential risk of filter bubbles, or echo chambers, and less reliable news on digital platforms,” ACCC Chairman Rod Sims said in a statement.

The ACCC has suggested that a new regulator is given investigative powers to examine how the companies rank advertisements and news articles.

Facebook and Google had no immediate response, although both firms say they are committed to tackling the spread of fake news.

Australia’s government ordered the probe into the firms’ influence as part of wider media reforms, amid growing concern for the future of journalism and the quality of news following years of declining profits and newsroom job cuts.

Like their rivals globally, Australia’s traditional media companies have been squeezed by online rivals, as advertising dollars have followed eyeballs to digital distributors.

Australia’s competition watchdog on Monday recommended a new regulatory body be set up to monitor tech giants Facebook Inc and Alphabet Inc’s Google and their dominance of the online advertising and news markets.

Australia’s competition watchdog on Monday recommended a new regulatory body be set up to monitor tech giants Facebook Inc and Alphabet Inc’s Google and their dominance of the online advertising and news markets. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) said in a preliminary report on the US firms’ market power that extra oversight was justified to ensure advertisers were treated fairly and the public access to news was unfettered. The report, ordered by the government a year ago, is being closely watched as lawmakers around the world wrestle with the powerful tech firms’ role in public life and their influence on everything from privacy to disinformation and traditional media. It follows moves by Australia last week to compel tech firms to help security agencies access private user data. Facebook and Google’s algorithms governing the display of advertisements lacked transparency, the ACCC said in its report, giving the firms “both the ability and incentive to favour their own related businesses” ahead of advertisers’. Similarly, the companies have usurped traditional publishers as news distributors, which has both hurt incumbent media companies and made it harder for readers to find accurate reports, the regulator found. “Consumers face a potential risk of filter bubbles, or echo chambers, and less reliable news on digital platforms,” ACCC Chairman Rod Sims said in a statement. The ACCC has suggested that a new regulator is given investigative powers to examine how the companies rank advertisements and news articles. Facebook and Google had no immediate response, although both firms say they are committed to tackling the spread of fake news. Australia’s government ordered the probe into the firms’ influence as part of wider media reforms, amid growing concern for the future of journalism and the quality of news following years of declining profits and newsroom job cuts. Like their rivals globally, Australia’s traditional media companies have been squeezed by online rivals, as advertising dollars have followed eyeballs to digital distributors.

Australian watchdog calls for more scrutiny of Google, Facebook

australian-watchdog

Australian Watchdog, News on Australian Watchdog, stories on Australian Watchdog, articles on Australian Watchdog, Australian Watchdog stories at Wion, Australian Watchdog news, Australian Watchdog latest news

australian watchdog

Australian watchdog seeks removal of stabbing video from X worldwide

Australian competition watchdog suggests new laws for digital platforms

Australian watchdog calls for more scrutiny of Google, Facebook