Platforms have ears: How our rights are Being Challenged in Digital Spaces

1. 1. Introduction

It is now a common sense that people in society enjoys human rights, which not only covers the right of privacy, freedom of speech, staying away from harm and other inhuman treatment, but also includes other elements that make yourself have dignity and able to pursue a happier life (The United Nations, 2025). However, if changing the focus to the online space, it is also known that the great participation into the Internet has already made itself another form of society, making people able to participate in commercial and socializing activities on digital platforms. Moreover, it is also recorded that the right of privacy is considered an inherent part of human right, in which being able to control personal information and preventing unwanted access from other people (Flew, 2021). Then an inference can be drawn that our rights in the online space, such as privacy and online security, can be an extension of the human rights because the same thing is required when using online platform. And it is also true that in modern society, our rights on online platforms are challenged in different ways.

2. 2. Why privacy, security on digital platforms and digital rights matter

Firstly, it is already known that people nowadays use online platforms and apps to gain more convenience in daily life. However, we may provide some of our personal information to these platforms so that they can start to function as a means of convenience. But providing personal information has the risk of property and safety loss if such information was leaked to the third party (Ross, 2017). Moreover, the privacy problem is commonly seen among digital platforms. For example, in the Facebook-Cambridge Analytica data scandal, the personal information of 87 million users was exposed to the third party (Flew, 2021). More than that, another direct form of challenging digital rights is online scam, scammers may use fake links on social media to acquire people’s private information so that they can use them to steal money or even use such information for more scams (Services Australia, 2024).

These two factors implicate that if our digital right is in danger, not only ourselves will suffer from different loss, but also increasing the possibility of more people experiencing the same suffer. That is why online security and privacy as well as digital rights matter.

3. 3. Cyber privacy breach in Australia, what has Australia done?

3.1. What happened? What is the influence?

According to Michael Daley, the state attorney general of New South Wales, a hacker made illegal entry into the NSW Department of Communities and Justice’s online court registry system and gained access to 9000 files (Dumas, 2025). To make matters worse, what files lost confidentiality and the purpose of the hacker remained unknown. However, the government admitted that during this accident, the detailed information of domestic violence survivors, even including children, has the possibility of being leaked (Dumas, 2025).

The influence of this accident is obvious, the leaked information could lead the survivors to greater danger. Because this could make them suffer from violence or unwanted attention again if those information falls onto the hands of the media or those who performed domestic violence on them. Aside from that, hence what kind of files lost confidentiality and the hacker’s intention still remained unclear, which also means more people’s online and real-life security is at risk. Although it can urge them to pay more attention to their own safety, the public will feel panic about this leakage can still be inferred.

3.2. The Challenge and Australia’s method

a. Digital rights’ definition and Australia’s development

Firstly, digital rights can be divided into the following elements: Internet freedom, intellectual property, Internet governance, and digital citizenship (Goggin, 2017). Moreover, digital rights will appear in different forms when it comes to different actors. For example, different gender and sexuality will have different notion and practice on digital right (Goggin, 2017).

Then when looking at Australia, one perspective of Australia’s understanding of digital rights can be concluded as three factors: privacy, which means being able to keep personal information confidential. Security, which urges public sectors, enterprises and other organizations to keep personal data from being breached. Lastly, transparency, requiring that there should be an oversight when governments or enterprises are using personal information. Moreover, it also required that the spread of information should stay away from enterprise or governmental censorship (Digital Bill Of Rights For Australia, 2025).

b. Why challenges appear

From the accident of leaking confidential files I mentioned above, it can be seen that this is an offend to people’s right of privacy and security. But how does this challenge come into existence?

The first thing to blame is the data-based system gaining more and more popularity and the inability of protective organizations of such information (MARWICK & BOYD, 2018). Then it can be inferred that the growing amount of such systems, together with the development of technology, increased the difficulty to keep confidential information from unwanted access, which potentially provided more chances for hackers to take advantage so that they can gain access to such information. As a result, another challenge is formed, which takes the form of distrust on the online security department or personnel of the NSW Department of Communities and Justice. It has already been reported that the DCJ advised domestic violence survivors to take precautions methods even if there is a reemphasis on the security system of this department (Dumas, 2025), which implied that the people who this institution is responsible to protect now had to take methods to protect themselves. And this may decrease their confidence in the DCJ and its online security department. As a result, they may be unwilling to turn to them for help thus their digital rights will be further challenged.

c. What Australia has done preventing challenging on digital rights?

Firstly, when looking at existing policies in Australia, in the field of privacy. It can be clearly seen that to promote digital right protection, according to the Australian Privacy Principles, the way to collect personal information, the allocation of responsibility, and people’s access to their personal information has been clearly defined. Aside from that, these Principles are actually the basis of the Privacy Act 1988 (Australian Government Digital Transformation Agency, 2025). Then it can be inferred that going against these principles can lead to punishment from the law. Moreover, hence online platforms also have to collect users’ private information for their service and functioning, then it can be seen that they fall into the range of this Act (Attorney-General’s Department, 2025). And as a law that is still in force today, this definitely can play a part in protecting digital rights from being challenged. However, this method still has shortcomings. For example, although this Act regulates how should the government collect private information, it can also be understood as rationalizing the government’s collection and use of citizens’ private information (Bygrave, 1990). Moreover, the right of privacy is not included in Australia’s Constitution (Goggin et al., 2019). This may possibly create an impression that privacy is not given the same emphasis as other rights mentioned in the Constitution. These two factors may become a drawback in digital right protection.

Another method on is Digital Platforms Inquiry performed by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. For example, the first inquiry of which is the influence of search engine (Goggin et al., 2019). So when looking at the inquiry carried out in 2025, it can be seen that there are three main focuses: digital platforms’ market legislative and regulatory development and its influence on competition and users, major development and trend in digital platform services, and current competition as well as consumers’ questions related with services in digital platforms (Australian Competition & Consumer Commission, 2025). More than that, in this inquiry, different entities such as enterprises, universities and other organizations have to reply in response to the issues paper published by the ACCC in order to help the ACCC understand the three main topics mentioned above (Australian Competition & Consumer Commission, 2025). This method helped protecting digital data from being challenged by promoting interaction between organizations and overwatching sectors, during which those organizations’ opinions on emerging digital topics will be exposed to the public and then users will see whether their intentions and opinion will impact their digital rights. However, it can also be seen that although this inquiry is made in 2025, the issue paper and organizations’ submission were made in 2024 (Australian Competition & Consumer Commission, 2025), which means it may synchronize with the new situation when meeting with sudden change in the market and policy, thus the organizations’ new opinions will not be seen.

The second method is the concept of consumer data right, by doing this the digital rights can be better understood (Goggin et al., 2019). Moreover, according to Goggin, this concept assisted in stopped digital rights from being challenged on Internet platforms by letting Australians have better control on their data and enable them to share them with trusted organizations for authorized purposes (Goggin et al., 2019). This helped in preventing challenges on digital rights by giving users the right of control. Hence if users can decide what to share with the online platforms, then they have more initiative during the interaction with Internet platforms. However, it still needs to be noted that Australians do not own their data. Instead, they only own a copy. And the data itself is under the joint possession of the user and the entity who holds it, which somehow lowered users’ initiative in interacting with online platforms because the data comes from the users but they only own a copy, the original one still belongs to the platform. Moreover, even if users decide to perform the consumer data right, the platforms can still possess and use their data (Productivity Commission, 2017).

4. 4. Comparison on the international stage, what has China done?

When viewing from the international level, China’s online platform users’ digital rights are also challenged. However, compared with Australia, China takes a considerably different method.

In China, digital rights are challenged in two forms: online scam and Internet violence. Online scam impacts Chinese citizens’ digital rights by causing casualty and huge financial loss, which was done by criminal syndicates and scam centers outside of China (Lee, 2025). However, the solution to this problem has been put out years ago, which is an anti-fraud mobile phone application launched by the Chinese police. The function of this app is detecting and reporting mobile applications that have evil intention. Moreover, it is also indicated that this app can track people’s access to foreign websites (Content Engine LLC, 2021). This method apparently helped in stopping the challenge on digital rights by limiting access to illegal apps and foreign website in case it is a scam so that there will be no more monetary or privacy loss. However, it is also perceived that this app has the potential to track people’s routine on phone and the install of the app is sometimes mandatory (Content Engine LLC, 2021), which is actually sacrificing digital rights to protect digital rights.

On Internet violence, the challenge on digital rights is exposing people’s private information such as identity, address, phone number, photos, etc. for harassing and creating rumors (The People’s Daily, 2025). The solution, however, mainly lies in law punishment and precaution from individuals and platforms. However, although such action is illegal, it is also noted that its source hides abroad (The People’s Daily, 2025), which means the challenge can only be weakened rather than terminated.

5. 5. Analysis and Conclusion

From all content above, it can be seen that the forms of digital right challenges are similar, mainly lies in privacy breach, monetary loss. But the solution takes different forms: Australia focuses more on legal construction and ensuring people’s the right to know, while China takes more forceful methods for data breach and its prevention.