5 ms·
This is all fine until that is what the "Postal Service" starts saying .. But you are right. Mailchimp and all these corporations which have clearly shown they
by eternalban 6y ago
This is all fine until that is what the "Postal Service" starts saying ..
But you are right. Mailchimp and all these corporations which have clearly shown they have no regard for the civil liberties that are fundamental to the American Social Contract need to find robust competitors, post haste.
- kube-system 6y agoThe USPS is an agency of the federal government and is subject to constitutional law. Likewise, if we want to talk about social norms -- private publishers have long enjoyed editorial authority in the US. Only in very few specific instances have we forced private publishers to publish against their will.
- esja 6y agoPerhaps the government should start building digital infrastructure. As they did with roads, telecoms, etc.
- adolph 6y agoWhat is the difference between a "private publisher" and a "common carrier?" Is Mailchimp guaranteeing the accuracy of everything they choose to send rather than block?
- eternalban 6y agoI haven't bothered to read up on the origin history of this company, but would not be a surprise if they started out as spammers. > guaranteeing the accuracy The entire construct of "disinformation" is a strawman. There is ample historic evidence that the populations of societies subject to lying government organs (c.f Pravda in USSR) learn to discern deception. If "disinformation" was so potent and deadly, none of the authoritarian societies that heavily relied on disinformation and lies would have needed to apply secret police tactics to control the population. They had both and they all still collapsed. "We need to control disinformation" is double speak for "we control what you are permitted to know".
- joshuamorton 6y ago"Propaganda doesn't work, so we should let the government spread propaganda and not worry about it" is certainly a new one.
- eternalban 6y agocute. Propaganda is not a recent phenomena and we went through an entire Cold War with a noted power with excellent propaganda techniques (soviets) without censoring at this level.
- joshuamorton 6y agoAh yes, the US government in the '50s was known for its cool headedness around soviet propoganda. The government certainly never did anything objectionable or concerning when given the ability to coerce those with suspected antigovernment sentiment. The red scares and blacklistings and HUAC were just my imaginings.
- eternalban 6y agoPlease cite examples of American press censoring content of other American journals and institutions based on a threat of “misinformation”. Just one will do.
- joshuamorton 6y agoAt this point I'm confused. I don't think that private companies censored other conpanies at all, even today, hence there is no need for the government to intervene. Further, government intervention in the media does end badly, so should be avoided. If your asking if a news group has ever refused to run a story due to dubious sources, yes. That happens all the time and has happened as long as there has been journalism.
- approxim8ion 6y agoNice that you had to parenthesize it, because both major parties involved in the Cold War were "noted power(s) with excellent propaganda techniques".