you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]emptiedriver 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

hm, you are really misunderstanding the argument or you just didn't read it. No one is saying they "want more censorship" but that censorship is now able to emerge through other means, ie, through people who have money being able to control what information gets prioritized. We need laws to make sure information is regulated in the sense that truth needs to be tracked by some means other than a pure free-for-all, because in that model, there is a fight for attention and audience that can be won through marketing. It's not censorship to be more strict about what has to be backed up before it can be promoted as fact. That can happen on both sides.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

make sure information is regulated

That's censorship.

It's not censorship to be more strict about what has to be backed up before it can be promoted as fact

That is also censorship.

Consider how much "misinformation" turned out to be correct. How Russia is currently banning "misinformation." That what might be considered "misinformation" today by the party in power may not be the same after election day, but those laws will still be tools to be used.

You can't just ban "bad speech," because as soon as someone can tell you what you can and can't say, it will be abused. And the Republican party is probably going to be in charge soon! Even if you're okay with the Biden administration censoring your speech, how about if it's Trump again.

[–]emptiedriver 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Consider how much "misinformation" turned out to be correct. How Russia is currently banning "misinformation."

but how are they doing it? By having rich people in power who can determine what information gets promoted. There are not fairly voted offices that have put agreed upon terms into a public square and talked about why or why not certain information is okay or not okay. They are just seeing which guys are able to shout the loudest.

Regulation is like having an FDA or laws against fraud, except that they apply to public information instead of food or private cases. If the same companies that own a profitable drug company are able to put out a lot of news stories about how so many people are suffering from vague symptoms that really should be medically treated, and then a lot of people go to their doctor saying "I think I have these vague symptoms" and the drug company says "we have this drug that is just the thing", doctors might feel more helpful if they can prescribe it and patients might feel more secure if they can take something. Even if it's all just sort of placebo effect or poorly understood problems, the drug company makes huge amounts of money before patients get tired of taking pills that it turns out weren't that helpful. If the FDA isn't stringent about what drugs are available - and they're not, lots of things are on the market and can be prescribed "off label" - doctors can end up being drug pushers because patients are lured into thinking common everyday feelings might be signs of syndromes or conditions by lobbyists, writers, and advertisers for these companies. They even call a whole branch of pharmaceuticals "lifestyle" drugs because they see it as the goal to get everyone taking something. That is a biased perspective. It's not the same as "free speech"

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

information is regulated

That is censorship. You're just finding different ways of saying censorship.

This is censorship. It doesn't matter how you try to reframe it, or tie in some convoluted logic that this helps free speech. I said the other day as a joke In Communist Russia there is no censorship, because people can not say the wrong things. You're arguing for what I joked about.

[–]hfxB0oyAPirate Party 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

truth needs to be tracked

Whose truth though?