CheckMate is a weekly newsletter from RMIT FactLab which recaps the latest in the world of fact checking and misinformation, drawing on the work of FactLab and its sister organisation, RMIT ABC Fact Check.
You can read the latest edition below, and subscribe to have the next newsletter delivered straight to your inbox.
CheckMate April 14, 2022
In this week's CheckMate (coming to you early, ahead of the Good Friday holiday), we investigate a suggestion from the Prime Minister that Australians had urged him, through Facebook, to provide less government support for flood victims.
We also offer an insight into the misinformation you might see during the election campaign, and share a chart depicting the stark difference in election ad spending between Clive Palmer and his opponents.
PM over-eggs criticisms about flood payments
When Prime Minister Scott Morrison was questioned over a claim that he cops criticism for giving financial aid to people affected by natural disasters, he told the ABC’s 7.30 program that he received such barbs “all the time”.
“I know I've got critics who say you shouldn't be spending money on helping people during these crises,” Mr Morrison said during an earlier interview on ABC Radio, as residents of Queensland and New South Wales grappled with the fallout from catastrophic flooding.
Pushed on that assertion, he told 7.30 host Leigh Sales on April 5 that some people say victims “shouldn't get payments, they should have their insurance” and suggested she “try looking at my Facebook feed from time to time”.
So, CheckMate took up the challenge.
Of course, it is not possible to check Mr Morrison’s Facebook “feed” without access to his account, but an analysis of nearly 15,000 user comments, extracted from posts published by Mr Morrison on the topic of the floods between February 1 and April 5, reveals such criticisms were few and far between.
While some comments can always be open to interpretation, CheckMate identified fewer than 30 posts (by 20 users) suggesting flood victims were receiving too much money and which were also, arguably, critical of the government.
As one user asked on March 2: “Scott Morrison (ScoMo) why are taxpayers paying for this[?] in the old days people fixed their own problems.”
The bulk of similar criticisms were made in response to a March 12 post featuring a young couple planning to rebuild their flood-damaged home in the same area, leading some to argue that aid should not be given for this purpose.
And while some rejected suggestions by other users that the government should be doing more, particularly for people without insurance, their comments were typically made in support of the federal government’s response to the disaster.
Many more comments were critical of the Government’s response, with these focused overwhelmingly on topics such as a lack of adequate financial aid, eligibility requirements for payments, fundraising by Defence Minister Peter Dutton for disaster relief in his electorate, or how the government’s emergency response fund was being used.
“Scott Morrison (ScoMo) $1000 is NOT much when you have NOTHING!,” read a comment on March 2, while another from March 9 asked: “You have given Ukraine millions[.] [W]hat about Australians????”
Looking at just one post from March 7, for example, shows that at least 80 comments were critical of the government's flood response in some form. None of these appeared to criticise the government for providing too much support.
CheckMate was unable to establish how many comments may have been hidden due to privacy settings or deleted.
CheckMate contacted the Coalition’s election campaign headquarters for evidence to support Mr Morrison’s claim but did not receive a response by deadline.
Keeping check on misinformation during the election campaign
Less than a week into the official federal election campaign, social media feeds are being blitzed with ads, candidates' faces adorn ubiquitous billboards and the media hangs on every word of both Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Labor challenger Anthony Albanese.
So, what sort of misinformation should you be on the lookout for, and how can you counter it? RMIT ABC Fact Check this week published a handy guide.
As experts explained, imported conspiracies about flawed voting processes had already been moulded to the Australian context ahead of the poll announcement, with claims circulating that people unvaccinated against COVID-19 would not be allowed to vote in person, and that mail-in ballots would be susceptible to fraud.
"The US may have had the highest profile of late when it comes to the spread of disinformation to discourage and confuse voters and to undermine public confidence in the electoral process with claims of rigged elections, but these themes are circulating and continuing to pick up pace in an Australian context," says Anne Kruger, the Asia Pacific director of misinformation research group First Draft.
"Examples include false claims that Australia will use [US-style] Dominion voting systems; and that the use of pencils on ballots can lead to tampering," she said in a briefing document supplied to Fact Check.
Politicians and lobby groups, meanwhile, had been capitalising on anti-China sentiment to run scare campaigns, though there was no evidence China had a preference for either major political party, or that Beijing was preparing to interfere in the election.
Other online scare campaigns identified by Fact Check included a Labor claim about cashless welfare cards and a Coalition suggestion that Labor was hankering to introduce so-called "death taxes".
Fact Check further identified claims from politicians about the economy and climate change as having the potential to be misleading.
Dr Kruger advised that it was important to be aware of your own biases when digesting political information during the campaign.
"Don't just let what you see on social media wash over you, as images and messages can all sink in and become familiar, allowing people to simply accept things as true," she said.
"Think about what ads you see. If you're seeing an ad, it's likely you have been specifically targeted from your demographic information."
Election Scare Alert: Death taxes
With the election just weeks away, the Coalition has returned to familiar territory, alleging that Labor would introduce some form of "death tax" if elected.
But does Labor really support the introduction of such a tax?
RMIT ABC Fact Check this week found there was little evidence to support such assertions.
The Coalition cites as its evidence a 2018 Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) document as well as historical statements of Mr Albanese and Shadow Assistant Minister for Treasury Andrew Leigh which pre-date their parliamentary careers.
However, the ACTU document does not reflect official Labor policy, and both Mr Albanese and Mr Leigh meanwhile have indicated they no longer support the policy.
Additionally, academic studies labelled previous speculation that Labor would introduce a death tax at the 2019 election variously as "not part of Labor policy", "false", "fake news" and "a scare campaign".
Sorting fact from spin in Clive Palmer's National Press Club address
Appearing before the National Press Club last week, United Australia Party chairman and Senate candidate Clive Palmer used the opportunity not only to unveil his economic plan for Australia, but also to discuss topics ranging from COVID-19 and lockdowns to a federal integrity commission and his own party's membership.
With so many claims bandied about in the one speech, RMIT ABC Fact Check put together a cheat sheet sorting fact from fiction.
On whether the UAP was Australia's largest political party, as suggested by the self-proclaimed billionaire businessman, Fact Check found it was not possible to make a like-for-like comparison.
While anyone can sign up to the UAP for free online, other parties require members to join their local branch and pay an annual fee of up to $900 (the amount charged for VIP membership of the NSW division of the Liberal party).
Fact Check ruled as incorrect Mr Palmer's claims that a former UAP senator was the first person to "introduce the idea of a federal [integrity commission]" and that 50 per cent of Australians died before receiving their superannuation.
He was also wrong to suggest Australia faced "unprecedented" levels of debt, and that 1,222 people had died as a result of COVID-19 vaccination in Australia.
Other pandemic-related claims made by Mr Palmer and debunked by Fact Check related to the medication hydroxychloroquine and lockdowns in Victoria.
CoronaCheck
COVID-19 vaccination misinformation collides with Ukraine war
With more than 4.5 million refugees fleeing Ukraine, and countless more impacted by the ongoing war, President Volodymyr Zelensky recently announced a one-off emergency wartime payment for those who have lost the opportunity to work.
But in a sure sign that pandemic-related misinformation never takes a break, suggestions quickly spread online that the payment would be withheld from people who had not received a COVID-19 vaccine.
Fact checkers at Reuters jumped onto one such Facebook post which read: "UKRAINE Wartime Payments Dependent on JAB STATUS?", finding that the claim was based on a misinterpretation of a speech given by Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal.
In that speech, Mr Shmyhal said that the payments would be made through an app already used to provide Ukrainians with vaccine-related payments.
"However, Shmyhal's reference in his speech to vaccine payments through the app was made as an example of the payment method — not as a prerequisite to getting a wartime payment," Reuters said. "This was clarified in a Ukrainian report on the new initiative."
Mr Shmyhal himself clarified his comments in a later address, stating: "Every employee, every sole proprietor, every citizen of Ukraine, from whom Russia has taken away the opportunity to work, will receive six-and-a-half thousand hryvnias without any conditions."
Edited by Ellen McCutchan and David Campbell
Got a fact that needs checking? Tweet us @ABCFactCheck or send us an email at factcheck@rmit.edu.au
