3 ms·

Do We Need to Reconsider Free Speech Law Due to Technology?

11 points by danielrm26 8y ago

elmerfud 8y ago
I do not subscribe to this idea that we must limit speech in order to preserve free speech. While much of the arguments for this philosophy sound good on the surface it is very much the slippery slope. The advent of the radio and other broadcast communication mechanisms caused this same stir and is part of the reason why we have the FCC. This kind of thought process translates our freedom of speech into freedom to listen. someone else is deciding the speakers and what they are free to speak about thus controlling the conversation. Once the conversation becomes one sided you don't know what you're missing. The first amendment to the United States Constitution that seems very direct in its wording and that's often what people refer to but I much prefer the wording in the United Nations universal declaration of human Rights article 19. "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
- yummypaint 8y ago
  I agree. The problem is that some people arent equipped with the critical thinking skills needed to evaluate claims of truth. Education is the only sustainable solution. So long as there is democracy, there is no getting around people having to make decisions based on incomplete and possibly bad information. Once any entity is given authority to punish people for their speech, that authority will innevitably be captured by special interests. We need to be kicking education into gear, but instead we continue to defund it.
ThrowawayR2 8y ago
> Audience Gullibility One wonders how this gentleman intends to successfully persuade the general public to agree that they should have their rights curtailed on the grounds that they are collectively too gullible[1] an audience to be allowed contact with ideas that those "wiser" and less gullible than them (presumably including Mr. Miessler himself) have deemed dangerous to their innocent minds. I suspect he will find the going difficult. "Beware those who would deny you access to information, for in their hearts, they dream themselves your masters." Though the quote's origin is in fiction, there are all too many real world examples of it. [1] I'm not being pejorative; the phrase "audience gullibility" appears in the essay as of the four pillars of his argument.

11 points by danielrm26 8y ago

I do not subscribe to this idea that we must limit speech in order to preserve free speech. While much of the arguments for this philosophy sound good on the surface it is very much the slippery slope. The advent of the radio and other broadcast communication mechanisms caused this same stir and is part of the reason why we have the FCC. This kind of thought process translates our freedom of speech into freedom to listen. someone else is deciding the speakers and what they are free to speak about thus controlling the conversation. Once the conversation becomes one sided you don't know what you're missing. The first amendment to the United States Constitution that seems very direct in its wording and that's often what people refer to but I much prefer the wording in the United Nations universal declaration of human Rights article 19. "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."

yummypaint 8y ago
I agree. The problem is that some people arent equipped with the critical thinking skills needed to evaluate claims of truth. Education is the only sustainable solution. So long as there is democracy, there is no getting around people having to make decisions based on incomplete and possibly bad information. Once any entity is given authority to punish people for their speech, that authority will innevitably be captured by special interests. We need to be kicking education into gear, but instead we continue to defund it.

ThrowawayR2 8y ago

> Audience Gullibility One wonders how this gentleman intends to successfully persuade the general public to agree that they should have their rights curtailed on the grounds that they are collectively too gullible[1] an audience to be allowed contact with ideas that those "wiser" and less gullible than them (presumably including Mr. Miessler himself) have deemed dangerous to their innocent minds. I suspect he will find the going difficult. "Beware those who would deny you access to information, for in their hearts, they dream themselves your masters." Though the quote's origin is in fiction, there are all too many real world examples of it. [1] I'm not being pejorative; the phrase "audience gullibility" appears in the essay as of the four pillars of his argument.