10 ms·

> "Europeans can say almost anything they want, both in theory and in practice." David Bendels has been threatened with prison time and sentenced to seven mont

> "Europeans can say almost anything they want, both in theory and in practice." David Bendels has been threatened with prison time and sentenced to seven months of probation for a Twitter meme [0]. It is the harshest sentence ever handed down to a journalist for a speech crime in the Federal Republic of Germany. This is the tweet, poking fun at the German minister of the interior Nancy Faeser (the sign says "I hate free speech"): https://x.com/Deu_Kurier/status/1762895292075053348 https://x.com/Deu_Kurier/status/1762895292075053348 [0] https://www-welt-de.translate.goog/politik/deutschland/article255889578/Nancy-Faeser-Harte-Strafe-fuer-Journalist-wegen-X-Posts-Ricarda-Lang-kritisiert-mangelnde-Verhaeltnismaessigkeit.html?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=de&_x_tr_pto=wapp https://www-welt-de.translate.goog/politik/deutschland/artic...

mehwoot 2y ago
He claims it was poking fun. The court found differently. > Bendels claimed the meme, posted by his newspaper's X account, was satirical. > But the judge in the case said during the verdict that Bendels published a 'deliberately untrue and contemptuous statement about Interior Minister Ms. Faeser (...) that would not be recognizable to the unbiased reader and is likely to significantly impair her public work'.
- MrBuddyCasino 2y ago
  If a picture of Nancy Faeser holding a "I hate free speech" sign can be ruled to be a "deliberately untrue and contemptuous statement", satire has become effectively illegal.
lm28469 2y ago
You might want to look into libel and defamation laws in the US too lol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law
- MrBuddyCasino 2y ago
  In the US, the threshold for libel is very high for people of public interest, and rightfully so.
anon_e-moose 2y ago
If grandma can't tell that the picture is edited, then it's no longer a meme, it's slander. The comedic value would be even higher if it was an obvious tongue-in-cheek edit. Given it's professionally and seamlessly edited, then it's too ambiguous to be a meme and thus should not be protected as free speech.
- MrBuddyCasino 2y ago
  If you think the standard for free speech should be delineated by what the most clueless members of society can grasp, then you're effectively anti free speech.
cruzcampo 2y ago
[flagged]

mehwoot 2y ago

He claims it was poking fun. The court found differently. > Bendels claimed the meme, posted by his newspaper's X account, was satirical. > But the judge in the case said during the verdict that Bendels published a 'deliberately untrue and contemptuous statement about Interior Minister Ms. Faeser (...) that would not be recognizable to the unbiased reader and is likely to significantly impair her public work'.

MrBuddyCasino 2y ago
If a picture of Nancy Faeser holding a "I hate free speech" sign can be ruled to be a "deliberately untrue and contemptuous statement", satire has become effectively illegal.

lm28469 2y ago

You might want to look into libel and defamation laws in the US too lol https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_defamation_law

MrBuddyCasino 2y ago
In the US, the threshold for libel is very high for people of public interest, and rightfully so.

anon_e-moose 2y ago

If grandma can't tell that the picture is edited, then it's no longer a meme, it's slander. The comedic value would be even higher if it was an obvious tongue-in-cheek edit. Given it's professionally and seamlessly edited, then it's too ambiguous to be a meme and thus should not be protected as free speech.

MrBuddyCasino 2y ago
If you think the standard for free speech should be delineated by what the most clueless members of society can grasp, then you're effectively anti free speech.

cruzcampo 2y ago

[flagged]