18 ms·
Right, so you are perfectly fine with allowing deliberate disinformation campaigns to run rampant even when they literally kill people, and backing it up with n
by toss1 5y ago
Right, so you are perfectly fine with allowing deliberate disinformation campaigns to run rampant even when they literally kill people, and backing it up with nothing at all.
And not even seeking a solution.
Got it
Are you also against regulating speech that amounts to yelling "FIRE!!" in a crowded theater and/or inciting a riot or insurrection?
I could also say 'fine, if intentional disinformation kills people, that's fine, let them go at it, it is just a stupidity tax'
Except I also understand the value of a society that is at least minimally cohesive and retains a stably democratic (small-d) foundation, and see the hard evidence that active disinformation amplified by mass media, especially interactive mass media can completely undermine that, and is literally a direct threat to democracy.
I'm interested in finding a solution and it will need to be more refined than a simple absolutist edict written centuries before mass media and interactive mass media were invented.
- JasonFruit 5y agoWhen someone insists on redefining your position before they'll argue with it, it's a sure sign they have a position they'd like to attribute to you and argue with instead. You've done that twice. I'm not interested.