3 ms·

I think it all three cases one problem was the lack of news. News agencies were shut down unless they "cooperated". Therefore having a wide spectrum of media i

I think it all three cases one problem was the lack of news. News agencies were shut down unless they "cooperated". Therefore having a wide spectrum of media is IMO desirable, even if it means fake news. The problem starts when the state regulates the media because that's when having only one (government friendly) source of information starts. Finally, I think, the problem is not the liars but the acting believers. If you fall for such a lie, fine you are entitled to think whatever you want. However, if you act on it (by threatening or committing violence), then you become a criminal. But that part is already covered by current legislation.

tormeh 10y ago
>Finally, I think, the problem is not the liars but the acting believers. If you fall for such a lie, fine you are entitled to think whatever you want. However, if you act on it (by threatening or committing violence), then you become a criminal. But that part is already covered by current legislation. It doesn't matter who the problem is, it only matters how to solve it. Claiming the mainstream media is lying ("lying press"/"Lügenpresse") and sowing distrust in traditional sources of truth was one of the tactics that helped Hitler rise to power. I don't know how to prevent this tactic, but the current approach of letting people just blatantly make shit up and push it as truth isn't working very well. It's very possible that it's the least bad approach, but we should at least consider the alternatives before concluding.