Welcome to Eureka Street
Looking for thought provoking articles?Subscribe to Eureka Street and join the conversation.
Passwords must be at least 8 characters, contain upper and lower case letters, and a numeric value.
Eureka Street uses the Stripe payment gateway to process payments. The terms and conditions upon which Stripe processes payments and their privacy policy are available here.
Please note: The 40-day free-trial subscription is a limited time offer and expires 31/3/24. Subscribers will have 40 days of free access to Eureka Street content from the date they subscribe. You can cancel your subscription within that 40-day period without charge. After the 40-day free trial subscription period is over, you will be debited the $90 annual subscription amount. Our terms and conditions of membership still apply.
There are more than 200 results, only the first 200 are displayed here.
As the government drafts legislation to stem the rising tide of misinformation circulating online, the nation debates: will these measures sufficiently regulate online content and curb potential harms or threaten freedom of expression? This moment is a critical test for the integrity of Australia's public discourse.
The proposed Misinformation Bill straddles the delicate balance between freedom of speech and the rising threat of misinformation, posing a challenge that could redefine the landscape of media and public conversation. The problem goes beyond discerning the truth, but determining how a democratic society identifies it amid a sea of conflicting voices.
When a comedic story is withdrawn from a literary contest for referencing Putin, it bears reflecting on various shades of censorship. In an interconnected world where social media storms can shape the narrative, what does freedom of speech mean for writers today?
In his 'Four Freedoms' series, iconic artist Norman Rockwell depicted a vision of America where people were free from want and free from fear. But with the threat of nuclear war looming, and arms merchants benefiting from conflict, how far off are we from truly achieving this ideal?
In recent days, if you were to listen to the media reports, you could be forgiven for thinking that religious educators want to retain a right to exclude children or teachers from their schools on the basis of their gender or sexual orientation. Nothing could be further from the truth. Or nothing should be further from the truth.
Filep Karma was found dead on a beach on 1 November, 2022. He was a respected and long-time activist for Papuan freedom. He was jailed in July 1998 and then released after eighteen months. In December 2004 he was again arrested and charged, being sentenced to fifteen years in prison. His crimes? Repeatedly raising the Morning Star flag.
Freedom of religion, a matter of national interest still to be resolved successfully in the Federal Parliament, has yet again become a focus for the nation’s football codes. The Essendon controversy has demonstrated how it is issues with a religious-cultural component, not economic issues, which most polarize our society and are the most difficult for politics to resolve harmoniously.
Governments have, with little opposition, passed laws that privilege individual choice on issues related to abortion, contraception, gender equality and marriage. If we regard unrestrained individual choice as the fullest expression of human development, we shall necessarily relativise and erode social bonds.
Recently many people have expressed disquiet about the trend to authoritarian rule throughout the world. They have good reason for doing so. In the world we are entering, the freedom of citizens in the State depends on the will of Governments that will have no enforceable obstacle to withdrawing such freedoms on suspicion of future misconduct and not just for punishment of past, proven misconduct.
Over recent weeks many people have expressed alarm and despondence at the rising number of infections and deaths from COVID. Just as we were enjoying freedom from restrictions we found ourselves encouraged to work from home if possible and to wear masks. The crisis and the recommendations recall the first onset of COVID in Australia. Yet the response of Governments is much less forceful. The differences between the responses and the reasons for them merit reflection.
13-24 out of 200 results.