Elon Musk, owner of the social media platform X, labeled Australia’s center-left government “fascists” in response to proposed legislation aimed at imposing fines on social media companies for failing to curb misinformation.

The legislation, introduced by Australia’s Labor government, would allow fines of up to 5% of a company’s global revenue if they do not adhere to codes of conduct designed to prevent the spread of harmful falsehoods.

Musk’s comment drew criticism from government officials, with some suggesting he has inconsistent views on free speech, supporting it when it benefits him commercially but opposing regulation when it does not.

The Australian government emphasized that the bill aims to enhance accountability and transparency for tech platforms, Reuters has reported.

In the past, X has engaged in legal disputes with the Australian government over similar issues.

Historically, governments have often used the justification of combating misinformation or disinformation as a means to suppress speech that they disagree with or to control dissent.

This practice can be observed in various forms across different political systems and historical contexts.

For instance, during World War I, the U.S. government passed the Espionage Act of 1917, which was used to suppress anti-war dissent, framed as a need to protect national security and prevent misinformation.

In these cases, the line between protecting the public from misinformation and infringing on free speech has often been blurred, leading to debates about the balance between regulation and liberty.

Written by B.C. Begley