3 ms·

Who decides what's false?

wahern 5y ago
Ultimately the fact finder at trial, just as in cases of fraud or defamation. But preliminarily often an agency, as with false advertising statutes. The government and courts decide truth and falsity all day, everyday. That isn't new. The real issue is the scope of speech and activities that are put under scrutiny.
- ryan93 5y ago
  Every Facebook post is going to trial.
Accujack 5y ago
Bingo, that's the problem with censoring misinformation. What needs to happen isn't censorship... I think more metadata needs to be provided with "news" information that gives cryptographically verifiable authorship, information source, date of publication and other items. This would allow people to use their standard logic for determining the veracity of information to be used. Yes, it needs supporting software and processes, but it's a better way to go than just trying to remove everything someone thinks is "false".
systemvoltage 5y ago
https://www.economist.com/international/2021/06/12/social-media-are-turbocharging-the-export-of-americas-political-culture https://www.economist.com/international/2021/06/12/social-me... It's already decided for us in indirect ways through influence on social media. Why bother censoring information when huge swaths of people will do it for you? Most of the public in the world, let alone USA are puppetted by algorithms and belief system of Silicon Valley. A person's brain has inputs and outputs. Inputs are overloaded with popular trends, social media posts, constant attention seeking and addiction culture fostered by these companies. Independent thought if it goes against the mainstream will get characterized as 'political' or worse 'misinformation', ultimately get shunned.
ipspam 5y ago
Irrelevant. The process is the punishment.
ithinkso 5y ago
Who decides what's obscene? A society. Gov't doesn't beam down to Earth from space but is elected. Overstep and you won't be voted on again and the bullshit will be reversed
AnimalMuppet 5y ago
It absolutely should not be the government (in the context of media, at least). Did you want Trump deciding what the truth was about January 6? About election fraud? Do you want Biden deciding what the truth is about the Afghanistan pullout? About Biden's state of mental ability? At least one of the two previous paragraphs should terrify you.
- version_five 5y ago
  Yeah, given recent history it's so odd to me that most people can't seem to imagine that a leader they don't like or agree with could also wield the power they are happy to give to government. Would you be OK with your enemy having this power should be a litmus test for any power we grant to government.
2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
A court?

Ultimately the fact finder at trial, just as in cases of fraud or defamation. But preliminarily often an agency, as with false advertising statutes. The government and courts decide truth and falsity all day, everyday. That isn't new. The real issue is the scope of speech and activities that are put under scrutiny.

ryan93 5y ago
Every Facebook post is going to trial.

Accujack 5y ago

Bingo, that's the problem with censoring misinformation. What needs to happen isn't censorship... I think more metadata needs to be provided with "news" information that gives cryptographically verifiable authorship, information source, date of publication and other items. This would allow people to use their standard logic for determining the veracity of information to be used. Yes, it needs supporting software and processes, but it's a better way to go than just trying to remove everything someone thinks is "false".

systemvoltage 5y ago

https://www.economist.com/international/2021/06/12/social-media-are-turbocharging-the-export-of-americas-political-culture https://www.economist.com/international/2021/06/12/social-me... It's already decided for us in indirect ways through influence on social media. Why bother censoring information when huge swaths of people will do it for you? Most of the public in the world, let alone USA are puppetted by algorithms and belief system of Silicon Valley. A person's brain has inputs and outputs. Inputs are overloaded with popular trends, social media posts, constant attention seeking and addiction culture fostered by these companies. Independent thought if it goes against the mainstream will get characterized as 'political' or worse 'misinformation', ultimately get shunned.

ipspam 5y ago

Irrelevant. The process is the punishment.

ithinkso 5y ago

Who decides what's obscene? A society. Gov't doesn't beam down to Earth from space but is elected. Overstep and you won't be voted on again and the bullshit will be reversed

AnimalMuppet 5y ago

It absolutely should not be the government (in the context of media, at least). Did you want Trump deciding what the truth was about January 6? About election fraud? Do you want Biden deciding what the truth is about the Afghanistan pullout? About Biden's state of mental ability? At least one of the two previous paragraphs should terrify you.

version_five 5y ago
Yeah, given recent history it's so odd to me that most people can't seem to imagine that a leader they don't like or agree with could also wield the power they are happy to give to government. Would you be OK with your enemy having this power should be a litmus test for any power we grant to government.

2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago

A court?