3 ms·

I don't think this is a good solution at all. If mom believed the scam at the time she retweeted it there's absolutely no crime there. Being wrong or deceived i

I don't think this is a good solution at all. If mom believed the scam at the time she retweeted it there's absolutely no crime there. Being wrong or deceived is not a crime. Frankly your proposing punishing the victim. Any actual solution would have to target the creators of the disinformation, and maybe those who knowingly spread it. Even that is hard in a freedom of speech context though. Even lies are free speech.

threatofrain 6y ago
Saying false things which hurts other people is tortious, not criminal. That's why we don't need to talk about mens rea, or whether or not metaphoral mom meant to be false or hurtful. When we're talking about Section 230, we're talking about torts, and when we're talking lawsuits, we're also talking torts.
- Volundr 6y ago
  Sure, I take your point that I'm thinking about it the wrong way legally. But I still maintain the idea is bass-ackwards morally and legally problematic. If mum believes the false Facebook meme she's a victim. Yes passing it on passes on the harm, but honestly I also think that doing detailed research into every meme before passing it on is an unrealistic expectation. Almost a decade ago I passed on the meme about Mr. Rogers being a sniper with x number of confirmed kills and always wearing sweaters to cover his sleeve tats. Exactly how much money should that cost me? In many way these memes are the natural evolution of "old wives tales" that have existed for centuries. Probably all of human existence. And from a tort perspective I'm still not sure this applies. Part of the harm from tort comes from the fact it's repeated. If I tell people X bank is financially insolvent, it catches on and there's a run on the bank I'm certainly guilty of something, but I don't think the people who passed it on in good faith are. Rather the fact people were passing it around is evidence of the tort, not additional torts themselves (but IANAL of course). And even if passing on a meme is a valid micro-tort in this scenario, now my mom has been materially harmed by whoever shared it with her. Does she now sue them in her own micro-tort lawsuit and the whole thing bubbles up like some kind of legal reverse ponzi scheme? It seems like all of these micro-suits floating around and sure to create the exact problem the original comment is trying to avoid.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - kortilla 6y ago
    But your mom shouldn’t pass on memes that make statements like that then if she can’t verify their authenticity. She is culpable in spreading it because it’s a deliberate action she took. Don’t spread information you don’t know to be true. Your “mom” in this context is actively spreading fear about topics and not knowing something is true for certain is all the more reason she shouldn’t be doing it. We have the Internet now, we don’t need rumor mills and information spreading second hand.
    - Volundr 6y ago
      > But your mom shouldn’t pass on memes that make statements like that then if she can’t verify their authenticity. She is culpable in spreading it because it’s a deliberate action she took. Don’t spread information you don’t know to be true. Are you sure you never spread information that isn't true? Really, really sure? I'd say with high confidence you have false beliefs you unknowingly pass on. I know I have in the past and assume I still do. People continue to pass on the whole "frog in a slowly boiling pot" anecdote over and over again even though there is no truth to it. It's simple common knowledge no one has thought to question. Should every person who does so from here on now be fined $5? How is this different than someone who is taken in by a meme shared by someone they trust?

threatofrain 6y ago

Saying false things which hurts other people is tortious, not criminal. That's why we don't need to talk about mens rea, or whether or not metaphoral mom meant to be false or hurtful. When we're talking about Section 230, we're talking about torts, and when we're talking lawsuits, we're also talking torts.

Volundr 6y ago
Sure, I take your point that I'm thinking about it the wrong way legally. But I still maintain the idea is bass-ackwards morally and legally problematic. If mum believes the false Facebook meme she's a victim. Yes passing it on passes on the harm, but honestly I also think that doing detailed research into every meme before passing it on is an unrealistic expectation. Almost a decade ago I passed on the meme about Mr. Rogers being a sniper with x number of confirmed kills and always wearing sweaters to cover his sleeve tats. Exactly how much money should that cost me? In many way these memes are the natural evolution of "old wives tales" that have existed for centuries. Probably all of human existence. And from a tort perspective I'm still not sure this applies. Part of the harm from tort comes from the fact it's repeated. If I tell people X bank is financially insolvent, it catches on and there's a run on the bank I'm certainly guilty of something, but I don't think the people who passed it on in good faith are. Rather the fact people were passing it around is evidence of the tort, not additional torts themselves (but IANAL of course). And even if passing on a meme is a valid micro-tort in this scenario, now my mom has been materially harmed by whoever shared it with her. Does she now sue them in her own micro-tort lawsuit and the whole thing bubbles up like some kind of legal reverse ponzi scheme? It seems like all of these micro-suits floating around and sure to create the exact problem the original comment is trying to avoid.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- kortilla 6y ago
  But your mom shouldn’t pass on memes that make statements like that then if she can’t verify their authenticity. She is culpable in spreading it because it’s a deliberate action she took. Don’t spread information you don’t know to be true. Your “mom” in this context is actively spreading fear about topics and not knowing something is true for certain is all the more reason she shouldn’t be doing it. We have the Internet now, we don’t need rumor mills and information spreading second hand.
  - Volundr 6y ago
    > But your mom shouldn’t pass on memes that make statements like that then if she can’t verify their authenticity. She is culpable in spreading it because it’s a deliberate action she took. Don’t spread information you don’t know to be true. Are you sure you never spread information that isn't true? Really, really sure? I'd say with high confidence you have false beliefs you unknowingly pass on. I know I have in the past and assume I still do. People continue to pass on the whole "frog in a slowly boiling pot" anecdote over and over again even though there is no truth to it. It's simple common knowledge no one has thought to question. Should every person who does so from here on now be fined $5? How is this different than someone who is taken in by a meme shared by someone they trust?