Why the ‘eKaren’ is trying to control content globally

If questions like hate crime are to be determined by a nanny regulator, after this court battle (between X and the eSafety office), who would trust Ms. Inman Grant to be that nanny-she can't even work out what is too violent for the public to have an interest in seeing.

Did we not learn from the pandemic?

We seem to be making all the pandemic mistakes again.

Overbearing legislation, untethered from legislative oversight; a suite of precautionary powers, ill-suited for their purpose and subjectively applied by a functionary who may or may not be qualified, again without proper oversight, but with wide-ranging and draconian powers.

Coverage in the legacy media has been appalling with front page images of Mr. Musk and Mr. Zuckerberg headlined "Social Enemy No. 1."

A screenshot of the front page of the News Corporation-owned Daily Telegraph newspaper, one of the main news publications in Sydney and New South Wales.

(Screenshot/Daily Telegraph) No doubt legacy media are seeking revenge for the social media giants' decision not to subsidise their production of news.

And there would be an anti-competitive element as the ability of social media to show videos and images in real time makes them more attractive than their establishment competitors.

The combination of mainstream media and politicians is a dangerous combination as we saw during COVID. They can actively suppress information that would have dealt with the pandemic more effectively, if they think it is in their interest to do so.

As the graph demonstrates, there is something more than just Australian going on here.

There is an alliance of actors that wants to snuff out the potential for the internet to be the new public square, whether because they want to control the narrative, whatever it is, or to control even what you can choose to talk about.

In this age, we are all digital natives, which means that we will be deprived as a society of the tools we need to think. You can't think if you are only allowed to talk about the facts that the eKaren says you can.

There can be no greater harm than that.