|
|
Post by thecitizen on Sept 4, 2024 17:28:24 GMT
There should be a disclaimer on social media outlets and news commentator outlets like FOX use the term “allegedly” when they report things they have not researched instead of repeating lies they heard and acting like it is news Or - hear me out here - don't swallow everything you read or watch hook, line, and sinker without doing some basic due diligence.
Be a smart consumer of information.
LOL, and that's the problem, isn't it. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Sept 4, 2024 17:30:58 GMT
LOL, and that's the problem, isn't it. Then don't watch it. Sticking a government disclaimer on it isn't going to stop people from watching Fox News, or MSNBC, or anything else.
Nor is it a good idea to have the government determine who gets that disclaimer and who doesn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Sept 4, 2024 17:41:30 GMT
LOL, and that's the problem, isn't it. Then don't watch it. Sticking a government disclaimer on it isn't going to stop people from watching Fox News, or MSNBC, or anything else.
Nor is it a good idea to have the government determine who gets that disclaimer and who doesn't.
Who is trying to stop anyone from watching what they want. No one is trying to stop anyone from smoking cigarettes (at least legally), but there is a warning on the packs. if you watch gossip shows, they always use the word "allegedly" to protect their free speech to spread gossip. Just putting a disclaimer on a social media site like "no information on this site has been fact checked" will at least give some people the incentive to research a little further. This is not even about the GOVERMENT in which you have such distain for. All social media sites gets the disclaimer, how about that. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Sept 4, 2024 17:50:33 GMT
Who is trying to stop anyone from watching what they want. No one is trying to stop anyone from smoking cigarettes (at least legally), but the is a warning on the packs. if you watch gossip shows, they always use the word "allegedly" to proctect their free speak to spread gossip. Lol. That is the whole point of the warning, particularly the new warnings because the old, text only ones were no longer effective.
You're unfamiliar with the "Community Notes" feature of Twitter? Twitter - more so than others - has practically operated as a public space for debate. You can read all of the responses and comments. You don't need a government imposed disclaimer.
Just use your brain.
It is about the government, and governmental abuses of power.
|
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Sept 4, 2024 18:03:33 GMT
Who is trying to stop anyone from watching what they want. No one is trying to stop anyone from smoking cigarettes (at least legally), but the is a warning on the packs. if you watch gossip shows, they always use the word "allegedly" to proctect their free speak to spread gossip. Lol. That is the whole point of the warning, particularly the new warnings because the old, text only ones were no longer effective.
You're unfamiliar with the "Community Notes" feature of Twitter? Twitter - more so than others - has practically operated as a public space for debate. You can read all of the responses and comments. You don't need a government imposed disclaimer.
Just use your brain.
It is about the government, and governmental abuses of power.
LOL, the government REGULATES those that abuse power. Hmmmmmm........I am sure East Palestine, Ohio, would have wanted the Norfolk Southern Railway to be regualted more strictly. People are going to be following rules. So if the government got rules for you to follow not only protect you, but society in general, why would you have a problem with that. You know people don't self regulate, that is not human nature, that is ideology. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Sept 4, 2024 18:17:18 GMT
LOL, the government REGULATES those that abuse power. The government also abuses its power. And it pretty much has a monopoly on force.
Non sequitur much?
Protecting free speech is about protecting society in general.
|
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Sept 4, 2024 18:28:05 GMT
LOL, the government REGULATES those that abuse power. The government also abuses its power. And it pretty much has a monopoly on force.
Non sequitur much?
Protecting free speech is about protecting society in general.
Not when "free speech" is hurtful and lies. You should know better. |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Sept 4, 2024 18:33:42 GMT
Not when "free speech" is hurtful and lies. You should know better. There are already remedies for that, and those remedies don't involve the government dictating what is and isn't acceptable speech. |
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Sept 4, 2024 18:36:55 GMT
Not when "free speech" is hurtful and lies. You should know better. There are already remedies for that, and those remedies don't involve the government dictating what is and isn't acceptable speech. A disclaimer does not determine what is "acceptable" speech |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Sept 4, 2024 18:43:32 GMT
A disclaimer does not determine what is "acceptable" speech If you're selectively applying it, it does.
And we've already seen that the government hasn't exactly been objective about applying the misinformation label and censoring social media posts.
There's no reason to think they won't abuse the use of a disclaimer, particularly once the precedent has been set.
|
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 26,036
|
Post by petep on Sept 4, 2024 18:48:47 GMT
Do we all see what the leftist govt in Brazil did. They shut down x because the leftist govt knew there was too much conservative misinformation going around ahead of the election. And some here in the states actually think that’s a good move. Biden Harris attempted their own disinformation governance board inside of homeland security. They had it going for a bit till moderates and conservatives pushed back hard. Imagine being stupid enough after all the history available to us to believe that a government is in the best position to decide what is true and not true, and then filter it for the populace. Yet many ignore this Biden Harris initiative. |
|
|
|
Post by Fiddler on Sept 4, 2024 19:38:47 GMT
there was too much conservative misinformation going around ahead of the election. Well.. at least you admit it.. |
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Sept 4, 2024 19:41:29 GMT
A disclaimer does not determine what is "acceptable" speech If you're selectively applying it, it does.
And we've already seen that the government hasn't exactly been objective about applying the misinformation label and censoring social media posts.
There's no reason to think they won't abuse the use of a disclaimer, particularly once the precedent has been set.
I don’t think you know what disclaimer is. It does not specify what is or is not misinformation. It does not censor. It is inconceivable to think that a disclaimer can be abused. Government is not the bogeyman |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Sept 4, 2024 19:46:31 GMT
I don’t think you know what disclaimer is. It does not specify what is or is not misinformation. It does not censor. It is inconceivable to think that a disclaimer can be abused. You're saying to add a disclaimer that what is being shown/watched is not trustworthy. That can be selectively applied. That can be abused. Just like the misinformation label has been selectively applied and abused.
The government can abuse its power though. And has, repeatedly. We need to protect against that, and one way to prevent abuses is to not give them additional tools and levers, to not give them expansive powers.
|
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Sept 4, 2024 20:02:01 GMT
I don’t think you know what disclaimer is. It does not specify what is or is not misinformation. It does not censor. It is inconceivable to think that a disclaimer can be abused. You're saying to add a disclaimer that what is being shown/watched is not trustworthy. That can be selectively applied. That can be abused. Just like the misinformation label has been selectively applied and abused.
The government can abuse its power though. And has, repeatedly. We need to protect against that, and one way to prevent abuses is to not give them additional tools and levers, to not give them expansive powers.
No, the disclaimer is placed on the site. Not on individual post |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Sept 4, 2024 20:06:03 GMT
No, the disclaimer is placed on the site. Not on individual post So you can target sites then.
|
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Sept 4, 2024 20:07:48 GMT
No, the disclaimer is placed on the site. Not on individual post So you can target sites then.
I said all social media sites |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Sept 4, 2024 20:09:52 GMT
I said all social media sites Which isn't what's going to happen. And not everything posted on social media falls under the category "allegedly."
|
|
|
|
Post by thecitizen on Sept 4, 2024 20:45:28 GMT
I said all social media sites Which isn't what's going to happen. And not everything posted on social media falls under the category "allegedly."
So you don’t know what a disclaimer is and what makes you think all social media outlets won’t have a disclaimer if it is made into law |
|
demos
Legend
Posts: 9,214
|
Post by demos on Sept 4, 2024 22:04:34 GMT
So you don’t know what a disclaimer is and what makes you think all social media outlets won’t have a disclaimer if it is made into law I know what a disclaimer is. And I don't know; maybe because we see how the government has behaved before.
|
|
