3 ms·
I don't know about fixing it in other countries, but in the U.S. the First Amendment doesn't allow for a regulatory fix. Doesn't mean it's unfixable, but it me
by gwbrooks 6y ago
I don't know about fixing it in other countries, but in the U.S. the First Amendment doesn't allow for a regulatory fix.
Doesn't mean it's unfixable, but it means that any fix would have to come from the private sector and be embraced organically rather than via regulatory fiat.
- rzz3 6y agoI don’t think regulations are the answer, personally. We need to think of better revenue models for journalists that incentivize trust. That’s on us, the consumers of media, to demand it and be willing to pay for it, and for the market to provide. I’d gladly pay 50 bucks a month for non-clickbait, unbiased news I can trust.
- paxys 6y agoIt is fixable by attacking the root of the problem – online advertising. Pass strong user privacy laws, ban fingerprinting/tracking across the board, make advertiser disclosures/"paid news" labels mandatory, significantly increase (and enforce) penalties for data breaches. Now sites are still allowed to generate as much click-bait as they want, but the incentive to do so is greatly reduced.
- runamok 6y agoLibel exists so I'd imagine some sort of legal consequence could be supported if you are spouting lies you know to be lies. It is a slippery slope though. I was just reading something recently about how the espionage act was used to jail people protesting war. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917 It feels like we are getting close to "shouting fire in a crowded theater" but at the same time this could be another weapon to squash dissent.