4 ms·

A liberal democracy's federal government should not be in the business of deciding which journalists are "propagandists".

by koboll 7y ago

spectramax 7y ago
Totally agree.
ericmay 7y ago
Kind of depends doesn't it? If those propagandists are, say, promoting the disuse of vaccines or that drinking garlic water is a cure for COVID-19 to intentionally harm Americans or the government? What if "journalists" convince a country to do something that's objectively bad for the country? Maybe, idk, Putin shills helping to convince people to vote for Brexit? I guess that's ok? I don't think it's that clear for a line.
- sojournerc 7y ago
  > don't think it's that clear for a line. Which is why liberal societies are on the side of individual responsibility, not authoritarian intervention.
  - ericmay 7y ago
    Yes, authoritarian intervention like this? "“There is enough for everybody,” German Agriculture Minister Julia Kloeckner said, castigating people for spreading panic by posting fake reports that supermarkets would be closing. “ https://apnews.com/15b99013e674de9ea83a707342e8ffe5 https://apnews.com/15b99013e674de9ea83a707342e8ffe5 When free speech causes panic (like shouting fire in a theater) or results in people actually dying, that's a problem for government to help solve. Writing some sort of op-ed is one thing. Actually working to undermine a country through the veil of journalism is another, especially if those people work for a disgusting dictatorship, like China. Or do we let people have "personal responsibility" and vote for more Brexit?
    - luckylion 7y ago
      > Or do we let people have "personal responsibility" and vote for more Brexit? Listen to yourself. "Should we really allow voting when people might vote wrong?"
      - ericmay 7y ago
        That’s not what I’m saying. It’s the propaganda and lies from the campaign fueled by Russia to dismantle E.U. integration that I’m talking about. Its too easy for a country to just pay someone to be a journalist and spread propaganda, while also banning it in their own country. Tools of liberal democracy can and are being used against us, so we need to ensure that we limit their damage while respecting liberty.
        luckylion 7y ago
        Sorry, I misunderstood you then. I do believe that the influence of Russian propaganda is vastly overestimated by you and others. I believe that they are paying and trying to influence and/or harm Western societies, but it's working because those are obvious break-lines that have been created over the past few decades. I see it more like a glacier that is going to calve any minute, and Russia is a guy with a 2x4, using it as a lever to help widen a crack: in the grand scheme of things, it's insignificant. RE "banning it in their own countries": of course, that's what authoritarian states do. It's always been my belief that if you want to uphold your standards as a country with a free and independent press, you need to accept that this can make things difficult. And your press must always, even if they think it hurts, be critical and vigilant. The US media all falling in line for the Iraq wars multiple times in a row and essentially becoming propaganda outlets did immense damage. That they admitted as much afterwards and promised to do better is noble (and is a major difference, that wouldn't happen in the state-controlled media of Russia, China or Turkey), but ultimately useless. I understand that they feel they have a responsibility to not harm their governments, but imho they are harming their societies much more by abandoning their role as an independent fourth power in democracy. If media companies discredit themselves, they're doing the enemy's work. If you know I'm out to get you and you keep lying for whatever reason, you're really making my job too easy, because all I need to do is point it out.
Natsu 7y ago
I remember a very different consensus on that when it was Russians and fake news, with a lot of fear that the disinformation would destroy our democracy. Why is China somehow different? They even have paid online trolls at a level that other countries can only dream of.
- take_a_breath 7y ago
  What was the different consensus you reference? Was there a universal campaign to get the government to label a journalist as propaganda?
  - drak0n1c 7y ago
    Yes. CNN, MSNBC, and Washington Post were supportive of Congress removing RT’s press credentials and gallery access. https://thehill.com/homenews/media/362540-rt-fires-back-after-capitol-hill-press-credentials-pulled https://thehill.com/homenews/media/362540-rt-fires-back-afte...
    - take_a_breath 7y ago
      CNN, MSNBC and Washington Post doesn’t even constitute a consensus of news companies, let alone Americans. This is mis-information.
- greycol 7y ago
  In one case you're talking about the rules on if people can gather information. In the second you're talking about the rules on what it's reasonable to publish. Few are going to argue the merits of China publishing lies which is the same as when Russia does it. What they will argue is that banning journalists from gathering information be it russian or chinese is wrong.
  - drak0n1c 7y ago
    Congress removed RT’s press credentials and gallery access. The move to limit their information gathering was supported by major US media outlets. https://thehill.com/homenews/media/362540-rt-fires-back-after-capitol-hill-press-credentials-pulled https://thehill.com/homenews/media/362540-rt-fires-back-afte...
kube-system 7y ago
Not within their own nation, for sure. But there is definitely a line somewhere between journalism and information warfare. The information age has brought with it a golden era of information warfare, and while the lines are blurring, they are still there. The dissemination of falsehood or misrepresentation directed by a government for the purposes of geopolitical influence is not journalism.
jb775 7y ago
We're talking about foreign agents working for a communist government's state-controlled media. So yes, the federal government should "be in the business of" managing this.

A liberal democracy's federal government should not be in the business of deciding which journalists are "propagandists".

by koboll 7y ago

A liberal democracy's federal government should not be in the business of deciding which journalists are "propagandists".

spectramax 7y ago

Totally agree.

ericmay 7y ago

Kind of depends doesn't it? If those propagandists are, say, promoting the disuse of vaccines or that drinking garlic water is a cure for COVID-19 to intentionally harm Americans or the government? What if "journalists" convince a country to do something that's objectively bad for the country? Maybe, idk, Putin shills helping to convince people to vote for Brexit? I guess that's ok? I don't think it's that clear for a line.

sojournerc 7y ago
> don't think it's that clear for a line. Which is why liberal societies are on the side of individual responsibility, not authoritarian intervention.
- ericmay 7y ago
  Yes, authoritarian intervention like this? "“There is enough for everybody,” German Agriculture Minister Julia Kloeckner said, castigating people for spreading panic by posting fake reports that supermarkets would be closing. “ https://apnews.com/15b99013e674de9ea83a707342e8ffe5 https://apnews.com/15b99013e674de9ea83a707342e8ffe5 When free speech causes panic (like shouting fire in a theater) or results in people actually dying, that's a problem for government to help solve. Writing some sort of op-ed is one thing. Actually working to undermine a country through the veil of journalism is another, especially if those people work for a disgusting dictatorship, like China. Or do we let people have "personal responsibility" and vote for more Brexit?
  - luckylion 7y ago
    > Or do we let people have "personal responsibility" and vote for more Brexit? Listen to yourself. "Should we really allow voting when people might vote wrong?"
    - ericmay 7y ago
      That’s not what I’m saying. It’s the propaganda and lies from the campaign fueled by Russia to dismantle E.U. integration that I’m talking about. Its too easy for a country to just pay someone to be a journalist and spread propaganda, while also banning it in their own country. Tools of liberal democracy can and are being used against us, so we need to ensure that we limit their damage while respecting liberty.
      - luckylion 7y ago
        Sorry, I misunderstood you then. I do believe that the influence of Russian propaganda is vastly overestimated by you and others. I believe that they are paying and trying to influence and/or harm Western societies, but it's working because those are obvious break-lines that have been created over the past few decades. I see it more like a glacier that is going to calve any minute, and Russia is a guy with a 2x4, using it as a lever to help widen a crack: in the grand scheme of things, it's insignificant. RE "banning it in their own countries": of course, that's what authoritarian states do. It's always been my belief that if you want to uphold your standards as a country with a free and independent press, you need to accept that this can make things difficult. And your press must always, even if they think it hurts, be critical and vigilant. The US media all falling in line for the Iraq wars multiple times in a row and essentially becoming propaganda outlets did immense damage. That they admitted as much afterwards and promised to do better is noble (and is a major difference, that wouldn't happen in the state-controlled media of Russia, China or Turkey), but ultimately useless. I understand that they feel they have a responsibility to not harm their governments, but imho they are harming their societies much more by abandoning their role as an independent fourth power in democracy. If media companies discredit themselves, they're doing the enemy's work. If you know I'm out to get you and you keep lying for whatever reason, you're really making my job too easy, because all I need to do is point it out.

Natsu 7y ago

I remember a very different consensus on that when it was Russians and fake news, with a lot of fear that the disinformation would destroy our democracy. Why is China somehow different? They even have paid online trolls at a level that other countries can only dream of.

take_a_breath 7y ago
What was the different consensus you reference? Was there a universal campaign to get the government to label a journalist as propaganda?
- drak0n1c 7y ago
  Yes. CNN, MSNBC, and Washington Post were supportive of Congress removing RT’s press credentials and gallery access. https://thehill.com/homenews/media/362540-rt-fires-back-after-capitol-hill-press-credentials-pulled https://thehill.com/homenews/media/362540-rt-fires-back-afte...
  - take_a_breath 7y ago
    CNN, MSNBC and Washington Post doesn’t even constitute a consensus of news companies, let alone Americans. This is mis-information.
greycol 7y ago
In one case you're talking about the rules on if people can gather information. In the second you're talking about the rules on what it's reasonable to publish. Few are going to argue the merits of China publishing lies which is the same as when Russia does it. What they will argue is that banning journalists from gathering information be it russian or chinese is wrong.
- drak0n1c 7y ago
  Congress removed RT’s press credentials and gallery access. The move to limit their information gathering was supported by major US media outlets. https://thehill.com/homenews/media/362540-rt-fires-back-after-capitol-hill-press-credentials-pulled https://thehill.com/homenews/media/362540-rt-fires-back-afte...

kube-system 7y ago

Not within their own nation, for sure. But there is definitely a line somewhere between journalism and information warfare. The information age has brought with it a golden era of information warfare, and while the lines are blurring, they are still there. The dissemination of falsehood or misrepresentation directed by a government for the purposes of geopolitical influence is not journalism.

jb775 7y ago

We're talking about foreign agents working for a communist government's state-controlled media. So yes, the federal government should "be in the business of" managing this.