正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

Here’s my full segment on Outsiders with Senator Matt Canavan regarding the ‘Social Media Minimum Age’ bill and more‼️

98,012 次观看 • 1 年前 •via X (Twitter)

10 条评论

Australians vs. The Agenda 的头像
Australians vs. The Agenda1 年前

Thank you to @rowandean, @RitaPanahi and @pwafork for hosting. You can support our citizen journalism via the link below ⬇️ Onwards and upwards 🚀

Rick 的头像
Rick1 年前

@mattjcan Congratulations @ausvstheagenda Well done Anthony 👏 an Millie

wayne ritchie 的头像
wayne ritchie1 年前

@mattjcan Well Done Anthony you are a huge part of the Media.

Be Brave Truthfully 的头像
Be Brave Truthfully1 年前

@mattjcan Brilliant. You got precise points across. Well done

Chris 〓 〓 的头像
Chris 〓 〓1 年前

@mattjcan You spoke really well and made some good points. Well done 👍

Kate Allen 的头像
Kate Allen1 年前

@mattjcan Congratulations & thank you for the work you do waking Aussies up 🙏💕

Ace🐳 的头像
Ace🐳1 年前

@mattjcan Matt Canavan is always the Voice of reason. Thank you. Well done to Anthony too.

Birdsong 的头像
Birdsong1 年前

@mattjcan If Gov Gen signs this abominable bill into law,then she's for politcians not for the Aussie people. #WakeUpTheGG #SubjugatedNotRepresented #EmailGG needs to use her veto powers to stop aggregious law #SackAutocraticPoliticians #WakeUpTheGG @SenatorRennick @SenatorAntic #Fight

Marylou✨ 的头像
Marylou✨1 年前

@mattjcan Well done!!! Well deserved exposure 🔥

ᒍIᗰᗰY 的头像
ᒍIᗰᗰY1 年前

@mattjcan Congrats @ausvstheagenda well deserved 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻

相关视频

You're not going to believe this. [Senator Matt Canavan] just got them to admit that Pornhub won't fall under the restrictions provided for by (63C) of the Social Media Minimum Age Bill: Senator Canavan: "If Youtube is covered [why isn't Pornhub] covered? [so] show me in the law where [Pornhub] is excluded" Senator Matt Canavan: If YouTube is categorized or covered by 63C, returning to Senator Roberts' question, is Pornhub covered? Why wouldn't it be? It's just explicit material, but yes, it's covered, isn't it? ACMA Representative, James Chrishold: No, the first thing of 63C, 1(a), is that the platform's sole or significant purpose is to enable online social interaction. Senator Canavan: But if YouTube's covered, as a video sharing service for non-explicit content, why wouldn't Pornhub be covered? Is Pornhub covered? I ACMA: I think they have very different purposes, yes. Can you explain that to me? ACMA "Sorry, I... I think this is under the definition; we wouldn't see Pornhub as falling within the scope. It's not seen as a social media platform. Senator Canavan: Just explain to me in simple terms how it would work if YouTube is covered: how would another video sharing service with mainly explicit material not be covered? ACMA: So again, Senator, it comes back to the commitment that the government's already made in relation to... Senator Canavan: No, no, I'm not asking for a commitment; I'm asking about the law. We've got to pass the law, not make government commitments. So, in the law, how are these two services different? ACMA: I think YouTube and Pornhub are completely different. Senator Canavan: I agree with that, but how are they differently defined in the law? Because well, Pornhub is a site for accessing pornography, which children are not permitted to access. Okay, show me in the law where that is excluded. ACMA: Well, yeah, it comes back to the evidence before about how Pornhub is subject to a suite of other rules and regulations, and also, it's not seen as a digital platform as part of this bill. The evidence is that we don't see it as having the characteristics of social interaction. It's a site for... I don't speak from any experience" Senator Canavan: I'm trying to understand here; it's very vague and unclear to any reasonable person about what's in and what's out. Not sure if Senator Canavan intended a pun there, but this is an astounding admission from ACMA. Especially when the purpose of the legislation is to supposedly protect children

Humanspective

768,739 次观看 • 1 年前