Who Needs Free Speech? The Government will Protect Us

[McDad]

I'm not at all comfortable with it. In fact, I oppose pre-publication censorship.

On the other hand, I am in theory in favor of there being severe financial (and in the most extreme cases, criminal) sanction for those who intentionally spread disinformation. Even worse where it is done knowingly.

You want to gain clicks and take in some dollars from the QAnon rubes by posting nonsense about a pizza place with a sex den in the basement? Ok. But when that is shown to be utter nonsense, you will be held financially accountable to the point you and others contemplating the same thing might think twice next time.

Get bent

The only benefit to your idea is that attorneys will not be allowed to share their version of "information".

 

[hog88]

I'm not at all comfortable with it. In fact, I oppose pre-publication censorship.

On the other hand, I am in theory in favor of there being severe financial (and in the most extreme cases, criminal) sanction for those who intentionally spread disinformation. Even worse where it is done knowingly.

You want to gain clicks and take in some dollars from the QAnon rubes by posting nonsense about a pizza place with a sex den in the basement? Ok. But when that is shown to be utter nonsense, you will be held financially accountable to the point you and others contemplating the same thing might think twice next time.

So you support Fauci being prosecuted/fined?

 

[Orangeburst]

One is gonna get a tranny op and start smoking 2 packs/day Camel filterless before they become pregnant and lactate
We live in an insane asylum

 

[DC_Vol]

I'm not at all comfortable with it. In fact, I oppose pre-publication censorship.

On the other hand, I am in theory in favor of there being severe financial (and in the most extreme cases, criminal) sanction for those who intentionally spread disinformation. Even worse where it is done knowingly.

You want to gain clicks and take in some dollars from the QAnon rubes by posting nonsense about a pizza place with a sex den in the basement? Ok. But when that is shown to be utter nonsense, you will be held financially accountable to the point you and others contemplating the same thing might think twice next time.

So you are in favor of prosecuting and fining people for telling lies?

 

[Orangeburst]

So you are in favor of prosecuting and fining people for telling lies?

The ultimate pretzel logic..Dems think they are doing you and I a favor for our own.ie societal good.

 

[volinbham]

So you are in favor of prosecuting and fining people for telling lies?

nobody unintentionally doubles down like LG

 

[EasternVol]

We have libel and slander laws already. Why would we need something else specific to the web?

 

[hog88]

We have libel and slander laws already. Why would we need something else specific to the web?

We need the government to protect us from mis/disinformation so we are only getting the truth.

 

[Sea Ray]

The problem with something like this is who gets to determine what's false? The gov't might say false information is saying Covid19 came from a lab in Wuhan or that Hunter's laptop was Russian disinformation. I don't want the gov't deciding what's false, that's for damn sure

 

[EasternVol]

We need the government to protect us from mis/disinformation so we are only getting the truth.

Well when you put it that way...

 

[hog88]

The problem with something like this is who gets to determine what's false? The gov't might say false information is saying Covid19 came from a lab in Wuhan or that Hunter's laptop was Russian disinformation. I don't want the gov't deciding what's false, that's for damn sure

The .gov might get it wrong once every blue moon but they would never intentionally mislead us.

 

[DC_Vol]

The problem with something like this is who gets to determine what's false? The gov't might say false information is saying Covid19 came from a lab in Wuhan or that Hunter's laptop was Russian disinformation. I don't want the gov't deciding what's false, that's for damn sure

This is where you’ll be told what to believe.

“Trust the experts”
“Trust the science”
“50 people signed a letter!”
“The government says it’s false”

It’s hilarious to see LG’s disdain for misinformation, given he’s spent the last 6 years gobbling it up. He has likely blocked out all the shat Democrats claimed as fact that were indeed bad information at best, outright slander at worst.

Only a fool would want to go down this path, and there are plenty to go around from both sides of the aisle.

 

[lawgator1]

So you support Fauci being prosecuted/fined?

So you are in favor of prosecuting and fining people for telling lies?

This is where you’ll be told what to believe.

“Trust the experts”
“Trust the science”
“50 people signed a letter!”
“The government says it’s false”

It’s hilarious to see LG’s disdain for misinformation, given he’s spent the last 6 years gobbling it up. He has likely blocked out all the shat Democrats claimed as fact that were indeed bad information at best, outright slander at worst.

Only a fool would want to go down this path, and there are plenty to go around from both sides of the aisle.

You all are omitting my point that it has to be intentional. The right's disdain for Fauci, which is largely based on garbage science they wish was real, does not qualify because there is no viable case to be made that he was intentionally spreading false information.

Or even put another way, spreading information he would have reason to know is false.

We can debate the criteria all day, my point is that if we are agreed that we ought not cut off misinformation prior to publication then the best tool available is to create an after-the-fact disincentive to those perpetuating it.

The following persons would be subject to scrutiny and likely fines, in my estimation:

 

[EasternVol]

The .gov might get it wrong once every blue moon but they would never intentionally mislead us.

Did somebody leave a pod under your pillow?

 

[n_huffhines]

Pregnant women?

Eight packs a day.

Let's just sue people spreading misinformation on that level.

 

[hog88]

You all are omitting my point that it has to be intentional. The right's disdain for Fauci, which is largely based on garbage science they wish was real, does not qualify because there is no viable case to be made that he was intentionally spreading false information.

Or even put another way, spreading information he would have reason to know is false.

We can debate the criteria all day, my point is that if we are agreed that we ought not cut off misinformation prior to publication then the best tool available is to create an after-the-fact disincentive to those perpetuating it.

The following persons would be subject to scrutiny and likely fines, in my estimation:

View attachment 565510

View attachment 565512

View attachment 565513

View attachment 565514

There are emails proving he intentionally spread mis/disinformation to the American people. Emails that prove he blatantly lied to us and congress. Either you are obtuse or blatantly ignorant.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Oof. Long live the Ministry of Truth.

 

[EasternVol]

You all are omitting my point that it has to be intentional. The right's disdain for Fauci, which is largely based on garbage science they wish was real, does not qualify because there is no viable case to be made that he was intentionally spreading false information.

Or even put another way, spreading information he would have reason to know is false.

We can debate the criteria all day, my point is that if we are agreed that we ought not cut off misinformation prior to publication then the best tool available is to create an after-the-fact disincentive to those perpetuating it.

The following persons would be subject to scrutiny and likely fines, in my estimation:

View attachment 565510

View attachment 565512

View attachment 565513

View attachment 565514

The disdain was well deserved. He brought it on by playing politics instead of just doing his job. Fauci was all about Fauci when he should have been about facts and best practices.

 

[Orangeburst]

Oof. Long live the Ministry of Truth.

SAF these people

 

[hndog609]

There are emails proving he intentionally spread mis/disinformation to the American people. Emails that prove he blatantly lied to us and congress. Either you are obtuse or blatantly ignorant.

C'mon...say it...orrrrrr he's _______________

 

[Orangeburst]

You all are omitting my point that it has to be intentional. The right's disdain for Fauci, which is largely based on garbage science they wish was real, does not qualify because there is no viable case to be made that he was intentionally spreading false information.

Or even put another way, spreading information he would have reason to know is false.

We can debate the criteria all day, my point is that if we are agreed that we ought not cut off misinformation prior to publication then the best tool available is to create an after-the-fact disincentive to those perpetuating it.

The following persons would be subject to scrutiny and likely fines, in my estimation:

View attachment 565510

View attachment 565512

View attachment 565513

View attachment 565514

**** so he was either a liar or incompetent and he gets a pass? ****

 

[Vol737]

You all are omitting my point that it has to be intentional. The right's disdain for Fauci, which is largely based on garbage science they wish was real, does not qualify because there is no viable case to be made that he was intentionally spreading false information.

Or even put another way, spreading information he would have reason to know is false.

We can debate the criteria all day, my point is that if we are agreed that we ought not cut off misinformation prior to publication then the best tool available is to create an after-the-fact disincentive to those perpetuating it.

The following persons would be subject to scrutiny and likely fines, in my estimation:

View attachment 565510

View attachment 565512

View attachment 565513

View attachment 565514

His emails, NIH ties to the lab in Wuhan and his bank account tell another story.

 

[volinbham]

There are emails proving he intentionally spread mis/disinformation to the American people. Emails that prove he blatantly lied to us and congress. Either you are obtuse or blatantly ignorant.

and he admitted to at least 2 lies (he considered noble lies) - masking and heard immunity levels. he said these things publicly (the admissions).

conveniently forgotten by our arbiter of all things true, misleading and intentionally false.

there are others as well

 

[DC_Vol]

You all are omitting my point that it has to be intentional. The right's disdain for Fauci, which is largely based on garbage science they wish was real, does not qualify because there is no viable case to be made that he was intentionally spreading false information.

Or even put another way, spreading information he would have reason to know is false.

We can debate the criteria all day, my point is that if we are agreed that we ought not cut off misinformation prior to publication then the best tool available is to create an after-the-fact disincentive to those perpetuating it.

The following persons would be subject to scrutiny and likely fines, in my estimation:

View attachment 565510

View attachment 565512

View attachment 565513

View attachment 565514

Right, so all the people you don’t like. You’re notorious for assuming best of intentions for people you support and the most nefarious of intentions for people you don’t. So thanks for making the point.

I’m sure you are well aware we can find known lies from Fauci, Schumer, Schiff, and many many more people. But I see they didn’t make your list.

You have a little chub over this because you know exactly what it would be used for: to punish enemies.

This shouldn’t even be a discussion because it’s un-American and strictly forbidden by the very first ammendment in the Bill of Rights.

Which goes back to my original point: this is thr kind of totalitarian stuff Democrats are all for these days. Very sad.

 

[volinbham]

Obama's "if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor" was false information that he knew at the time. His own plan architects noted it.

It's a significant lie as it rallied support for a fundamental changing of an industry that represents 1/6 of the economy.

guessing that one gets a pass too.