Joanna Howe has spent

$455,264

on Meta ads.

That includes almost $100,000 since October 2025.

How is one private citizen doing that?

I'm just some guy, but I tried looking into this using only public information, because that spend would mean an absurd number of those ugly-ass hoodies have been sold.
Scroll down or use the buttons to see my findings, plus links to actual healthcare resources.
Others with much more expertise have covered Dr Howe's medical misinformation in far greater detail, so I need not rehash that, other than to say abortion is healthcare.

• Meta Ad Data
• Weird Governance
• Health resources

* All time spending data, retrieved 8 March 2026.

Digging into the Meta Data.

Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram, publishes the ad spend for 'social issues, elections or politics'. That includes parties, government agencies, shops for bogan patriotism merch, and our mate Jo.The disclaimer ('authorised by') Dr Joanna Howe was
• the 19th highest spending advertiser in the prior 90 days
• the 76th highest spender all time^*

She's on the 4th page of all-time spenders. Of 2266 pages.Of the nine disclaimers pointing to 'Advance Australia', Dr Jo outspends all but one.She outspends Family First, Liberal Democrats, Australian Christians, Katter, and even Pauline fuckin Hanson's One Nation — all time, with every jurisdiction having an election in that time.She even spends more than the billionaire propaganda factory think tank Institute for Public Affairs.Don't believe me? Check out the numbers:

• Meta's Ad Library Report Tool

The governance of public campaigner Dr Joanna Howe.

So this is where at least some of the money is being spent. Even if this is every cent she has coming in, where is that coming from?!Dr Jo non-medicine woman's website will take your money but doesn't seem to state where it goes. Not even how she spends, but what entity is taking the cash?Her site has no ABN, and certainly no charity registration stated. Just take her word that it helps the cause, right?

Amusingly, BirdFlip isn't even a registered business name when you search ASIC. An oversight like, idk, not buying your domain... But who among us, right?

Worry not! She's definitely taken the time to register the BirdFlip name and logo as trademarks. Just peep the protected categories...

• BirdFlip on IP Australia

BirdFlip is protected for all these kinds of merch and video content. Just not, you know, anything directly relating to her cause. Those would have been Class 35, 'Advocacy, lobbying, campaigning services including such services for promoting awareness on community issues relating to...' denying women medical care, protecting clumps of cells, etc., etc.She hasn't even included Class 36, fundraising.I'm no expert on IP law, but that seems, in my honest opinion, to have an odour of it. Protecting the IP of your brand for revenue generation in your opaque enterprise structure.

And then we get to income and tax. To be clear, I'm not a lawyer or an accountant. I've just noticed some of the money being spent, and can't see how it's coming in.

According to the ATO, you must register for GST:
• when your business or enterprise has a GST turnover of $75,000 or more [she's clearly over this, given the Meta spend]
• when you start a new business and expect your turnover to reach the GST threshold (or more) in the first year of operation [Jo's ABN is from 2014, and BirdFlip was founded in 2023]
• if you're already in business and have reached the GST threshold
• if your non-profit organisation has a GST turnover of $150,000 per year or more [still over, and not a charity]Failing to manage your tax obligations can attract penalties. I don't know how expensive a penalty unit is, but 20 of them sounds pricey!Obviously, I can't (and shouldn't be able to!) access her personal income tax info, but fingers crossed, she's paying income tax on donations, whatever legal entity actually receives them.

So is she a lobbyist?

Our heroine is an adult and a citizen. She has every right to have her voice heard. But she's had so much access to parliament, even without the extravagant Meta spend, her voice is heard above that of any ordinary citizen. So much so, they had to ban her ass from the SA Legislative Council.I'm also an adult and a citizen, and I don't think I'd be allowed enough access to be banned from a whole house of Parliament.So let's have a gander at the Lobbying Code of Conduct (Cth):

"...lobbying activities means communications with a Government representative in an effort to influence Government decision making, including the making or amendment of legislation, the development or amendment of a Government policy or program...but does not include any of the following:
• communications with a committee of the Parliament;
• communications with a person who is a Minister or Parliamentary Secretary in that person’s capacity as a local Member or Senator in relation to non ministerial responsibilities;
• communications in response to a call for submissions;
• petitions or communications of a grassroots campaign nature in an attempt to influence a Government policy or decision;
• communications in response to a request for tender;
• statements made in a public forum;
• responses to requests by Government representatives for information.
Note: Organising a meeting may constitute lobbying activities if, in the course of arranging that meeting, representations of a kind referred to in this definition are made to Government representatives."
...
...a lobbyist does not include any of the following:
• charitable, religious and other organisations or funds that are endorsed as deductible gift recipients;
• non profit associations or organisations constituted to represent the interests of their members that are not endorsed as deductible gift recipients;
• persons making representations on behalf of relatives or friends about their personal affairs;
• members of trade delegations visiting Australia;
• persons who are registered under an Australian Government scheme regulating the activities of members of that profession, such as registered tax agents, customs brokers, company auditors and liquidators, provided that their dealings with Government representatives are part of the normal day to day work of people in that profession;
• members of professions, such as doctors, lawyers or accountants, and other service providers, who make occasional representations to Government on behalf of others in a way that is incidental to the provision to them of their professional or other services.

Neither Jo nor BirdFlip seem to be registered as a lobbyist. I can't find a related entity on the South Australian, New South Wales or Commonwealth lobbyist registers.To me, that means it comes down to the word 'grassroots'.Based on the facts I can find, Dr Howe receives money through her personal website to an unknown entity. This could be the for-profit entity BirdFlip aka Australia Life Pty Ltd, or directly to herself, personally. Or maybe a secret third thing.Neither identifiable entity is a charity or a registered lobbyist, and BirdFlip doesn't even purport to engage in advocacy or cause-related fundraising per its selection of intellectual property protection.All of this while she leans on the conferred credibility of, and draws a salary from, Adelaide University.

So what, then?

These are the possibilities that come to my mind, based on this information.1. Astroturfing.
It's difficult to believe a boutique, home-spun little unincorporated entity like Jo's not-charity is bringing in half a mil to buy Facebook ads. Which suggests that some big-money interests are footing the bill. But not disclosing this is — again, in my opinion — inherently suspicious. Is this the Catholic church? I can think of better places they could spend their money. Is it an import of American culture war from some benefactor there? Or something homebaked but even more cynical, aimed at social disunity at large, or targeted misogyny against women's healthcare? I don't know.2. Grift.
While her spend-to-engagement ratio suggests otherwise, this could still be proper grassroots, mum-and-dad-style, tiny donations. Just a hell of a lot of them. Maybe she truly has drummed up enough cranks who think a Doctor of Law knows healthcare and morality better than actual clinicians. But BirdFlip, by everything I can tell, is a purely for-profit enterprise. And that's just for the transactions where they sell merch. Funds sent via Joanna's own site just go into a black hole. Does that mean she's just taking untaxed gifts? I don't know.

Proper healthcare resources.

I've avoided digging into the medical side of this because others have and continue to do it far better than I could. To understand the medical misinformation, check out these sources:

• SA Abortion Coalition
• politik.hunt
• howeshelies
• bird.song.oak
• bellegetspolitical

Reliable medical authorities with actual healthcare information:

Services that provide relevant healthcare:

The image here is used to satirise Joanna Howe. All content here references publicly available sources and, through my own personal analysis laid out here, expresses my honest opinion. That should rule out any suggestion that I'm defaming Jojo.I have not met and have had zero contact with Dr Howe, including on social media under any account. I'm just a guy sharing his honest opinion and pointing out what I believe is suspicious af.I'm not affiliated with any political or advocacy organisation (other than my union) or employed by a healthcare provider, and have no association with any organisation linked above. My union membership is relevant to my vocation, but I have not consulted with or sought their input on this website, and it's not endorsed by them. Or anyone else, for that matter.If you have any updates or can correct anything here, please contact me.And Jo, (you definitely seem like the type to Google yourself), if you want to share financial statements or otherwise clear up any misunderstandings or correct inaccuracies, I'll happily publish them and attribute any verifiable sources.

[email protected] - Updated, because I'm branching out to more pages.