There are currently no rules at either the state or federal level to stop political parties and candidates from using AI-generated material in election campaigns.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-07-22/qld-premier-slams-opposition-for-ai-generated-tiktok/104126936

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-07-23/labor-questioned-over-ai-generated-tiktok-of-peter-dutton/104131228

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] unionagainstdhmo@aussie.zone 1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

No, @Zagorath@aussie.zone did some analysis a while ago and found that Labor were overrepresented in parliament based on first preferences nationally, ignoring the electoral boundaries. The Greens, One Nation and various independents would have more representation in parliament if we didn't use localities to determine the makeup of parliament

[–] stepchook@mastodon.au 2 points 1 month ago

@unionagainstdhmo
I'm not about to vote liberal, but feel disappointed by some Labor decisions. The anti-protest law in particular seem to have bipartisan support despite democratic resistance. Protests over freedom of association were once the backbone of union membership and strength.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That's true.

The Greens proportionally deserve 18.4 seats, but have only 4.

Labor deserves 48.9 seats but has 68.

LNP deserves 53.6, but has 58.

One Nation deserves 7.4, has 0.

It's actually a very easy calculation to do yourself. Literally just 150 × percentage 1st preference votes. Obviously it's not perfect, because if you change the voting system you also change how parties campaign, which changes how the votes turn out. But it's a good rough idea.

But uhh...I'm not really sure how this is relevant to this thread.

[–] unionagainstdhmo@aussie.zone 2 points 1 month ago

But uhh…I’m not really sure how this is relevant to this thread.

Idk I was interpreting their comment as saying that Labor aren't very popular which is true at least in terms of first preferences