I'm glad the EU is acting to combat this, but there's a deeper problem. The amount of people who lack basic critical thinking skills, and can't figure out the truth of facts for themselves. The amount of people who've become convinced vaccines are dangerous, being just one recent example of this.
this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
57 points (93.8% liked)
Futurology
1655 readers
226 users here now
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 15 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
Eroding the aspects of public education that contribute to people's critical thinking skills and civics knowledge has been in the republican playbook since the Regan administration. Not that we were all that known for it before then...
I mean it's pretty bad to have private corporations as gatekeepers of "the truth" in any case.
What is disinformation but free speech by another name? And every American has the constitutional right to free speech regardless of how unhinged and divorced from reality that speech may be.
8 hrs later, an update:
I don't believe this. There are absolutely limits to free speech.
People have a huge misconception of what free speech is. Free speech is the ability to speak against or question the government without consequence. It doesn't have anything else to do with saying whatever you want to say.
Example:
"Cheerios are made by milking bats." is not free speech. It's just a lie.
"The president is wrong, and doesn't know what he's doing." is exercising my right to free speech.
The misconception is that freedom of speech means anything other than freedom from prosecution by the state for your speech. It does not mean you are entitled to a platform, it does not mean you cannot be shouted down, and it does not mean private entities cannot (or even should not) censor your speech.
It's important to keep unpopular speech legally protected. It's not at all important to ensure it has a robust platform. For example, Nazis should not be arrested for saying Nazi things; but they should absolutely be deplatformed, socially shunned, and have a blind eye cast when they get punched in the mouth for saying Nazi things in public.
What about "The radical, left-wing Democrat president is continuing Antifa's crusade against Americans by forcing Cheerios to adopt the supposedly environmentally friendly policy of milking bats to produce the classic American breakfast cereal."
Where does that fall? It sounds like free speech to me.
That would be free speech, yes.
Lol see? Just like that, you can lie profusely as free speech. America!
It's even more effective if you just assert random bullshit, mention someone political figure you hate or like, whatever the intent. It's free speech even if it is completely divorced from reality as long as you criticize the government, I guess.
Back in the day journalists wouldn't have been able to publish a story covering what you just quoted. It had to be factual. But that was ripped away, unfortunately. Hell, before Trump and Conway outlets would still point out when someone was flat out lying. But "alternate facts" get more views so they went along with it.
Liable should come up more, imo. I don't know why it doesn't.
Constitutional right to free speech does not equal a right to a platform for that speech. Disinformation should not be legally prosecuted but, it's absolute horse shit to claim that social media companies owe it the same indifference as the government does.
Stop conflating the legal right to free speech with the (non-existent) right to use someone else's platform for said speech.
Constitutional right to free speech does not equal a right to a platform for that speech.
Exactly. That's why communists don't have a voice anywhere. It's no one's fault that rich and/or politically powerful people more easily align with authoritarianism and fascism and just so happen to own those platforms. It does mean that groups and individuals advocating for under-represented perspective languish in obscurity. And there's no reason why those voices should be represented on any mainstream platform. They have a constitutional right to scream at the top of their fossil-fuel charred lungs about climate change on the corner of the street like any homeless person. They don't have the right to do it on Twitter or Facebook.
Much like screaming FIRE!! in a crowded venue, there has to be a limit on free speech, and that limit is typically when it causes harm to other people