U.S. is barred from combating disinformation on social media. Here's what it means

submitted by YoMamma from npr.org

all 48 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Drewski 13 insightful - 6 fun13 insightful - 5 fun14 insightful - 6 fun -  (9 children)

The government's ability to fight disinformation online has suffered a legal setback that experts say will have a chilling effect on communications between federal agencies and social media companies.

Oh no, not a "chilling affect" on government coercing social media companies into censoring speech at their behest! Never mind all the people that were silenced for expressing viewpoints contrary to their narrative.

[–][deleted]  (8 children)

[deleted]

    [–]Drewski 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (7 children)

    Everyone should have an opportunity to challenge disinformation.

    Agreed

    The trump-appointed judge wants to restrict the free speech of those who challenge disinformation.

    That's not what was happening here. Government agencies were pressuring private companies to censor content posted by their users. The government does not get to decide what is "disinformation" and force a platform to remove it. That is fascism.

    [–][deleted]  (6 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]Drewski 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

      Anyone can challenge disinformation; I'm doing it right now by replying to your comment. Any government employee or agency can still make a social media post or reply saying "Hey, so and so is disinformation!". What they can't do anymore is privately go to Facebook or Twitter and say "Hey, we want you to remove this user's post, which we consider disinformation, or else..."

      Challenging disinformation is still fine, coercing private companies to censor free speech is not.

      [–][deleted]  (4 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]In-the-clouds 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

        not going to be possible

        /u/Drewski was talking in present tense and you are talking about a future time.

        Even if the entire world's government said it is illegal to say this or that, we can still speak. Yes, we would be persecuted and some killed, but no government can take away our free will. We can still choose to remain silent or to speak what we think is the truth, regardless of the consequences.

        Jesus Christ spoke against the ways of the world and was crucified, but it was still possible for him to speak. Even though the government of that day with the religious leaders condemned his physical body to death, he was resurrected, is alive, and his word is living and powerful. The world's government is weak. All they can do is attack the physical body which is temporary anyway. The soul exists for ever. And here we are 2,000 years later and I still have his words recorded in multiple forms and even in my heart, to the displeasure of many worldly rulers.

        [–][deleted]  (2 children)

        [deleted]

          [–]In-the-clouds 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

          Those that tell lies will not enter the kingdom of God. But we live in a generation where the truth is called a lie and the lie is called truth.

          Many here realize the COVID fear mongering was based on lies. When people tried to speak the truth about the shots, sites like YouTube and Twitter marked the posts as incorrect, and accounts were suspended or removed. This was censorship. But they pretended to protect the public from misinformation.

          America is Babylon....and is fallen, is fallen! She has become full of sin of all kinds. The other nations will watch her burn from afar.... Because she would not repent. Her leaders also would not repent. But we as individuals can repent, turn to Jesus, and be saved.

          [–]SoCo 12 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

          The weaponized professional spin-articles are coming out on this topic, hoping to throw shade on the subversion of democracy.

          They took a little while longer, so this must be a hard one to spin. Shit-birds at arstechnica also did a careful downplaying article.

          It must of taken some extra time to buy the fake comments on the news articles too.

          Remember that Congress spent years loudly and publicly threatening to destroy social media companies with anti-trust enforcement, before forcing them to play ball with this "public-private partnership", where the government demands social media sites remove specific users and content.

          We know from the Twitter leaks that a lot of what they were demanding to be removed was not disinformation. Quite a few incidents showed that government entities demanded the removal of content that they knew was true and was not disinformation.

          [–]Dragonerne 12 insightful - 3 fun12 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 3 fun -  (7 children)

          Propaganda article

          [–]Airbus320 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          Probably made by Israel

          [–][deleted]  (5 children)

          [deleted]

            [–]Canbot 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

            It's not. It is clearly propaganda.

            [–]Dragonerne 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

            A propaganda report

            [–][deleted] 11 insightful - 5 fun11 insightful - 4 fun12 insightful - 5 fun -  (10 children)

            Reported for disinformation. (And I suspect vote manipulation)

            Who can forget such classic informations as "If you are vaccinated you can't get Covid", and "The lab leak has been completely debunked". It's a good thing we censored the experts saying otherwise for 2 years eh socko, you fucking bootlicker

            [–][deleted]  (9 children)

            [deleted]

              [–][deleted] 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

              wants to limit the free speech of those who want to challenge the spread of disinformation

              I'm pretty sure thats commonly referred to as censorship, those mental gymnastics are very impressive though. Nobody is stopping them from challenging information

              [–][deleted]  (5 children)

              [deleted]

                [–][deleted] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

                No, they are allowed to present their counter evidence and counter arguments anywhere they would like, the government does NOT lack a platform to present information. That's how a free exchange of ideas works. A ministry of truth is for 1984

                [–][deleted]  (1 child)

                [deleted]

                  [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                  LEGALLY, what is promoted by this judge is the removal of OUR rights to challenge disinformation.

                  Where does it say that? You are either trolling or dumb.

                  [–]stickdog 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

                  Nobody is stopping the federal government from doing anything other than forcing private social media companies to censor protected political speech.

                  [–]stickdog 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

                  LOL. The government is not allowed to restrict political speech.

                  This is called the First Amendment. Have you ever heard of it?

                  [–][deleted] 11 insightful - 3 fun11 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

                  Look at these NPR kikes putting "free speech" and "protected free speech" into quotation marks, like it's not a legal term or the very foundation of the US.

                  [–][deleted]  (5 children)

                  [deleted]

                    [–]MuskyIndependent 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

                    Texan fascists want to spread disinformation and to do that they need to restrict the free speech of the others

                    Free speech must be restricted so we can have free speech.... do you even hear yourself?

                    [–][deleted]  (1 child)

                    [deleted]

                      [–]MuskyIndependent 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                      No

                      [–]stickdog 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

                      Where is the ruling does it say anything about restricting the free speech of anyone?

                      Quote the exact part of the ruling that you are referring to.

                      [–]AXXA 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

                      /s/politics/comments/b350/biden_regime_files_notice_of_appeal_in_mo_v_biden/

                      /s/politics/comments/b3dp/the_feds_really_really_want_to_be_able_to_control/

                      /s/censorship/comments/b3et/cnn_host_we_should_yield_to_government_censorship/

                      /s/WorldNews/comments/b2uz/us_court_victory_against_online_censorship_a/

                      /s/news/comments/b2tm/judge_orders_biden_administration_to_limit/

                      /s/WayOfTheBern/comments/b39d/cnn_censorship_makes_sense_probably_what_we/

                      /s/WayOfTheBern/comments/b32h/the_telegraph_joe_biden_launched_orwellian/

                      /s/WayOfTheBern/comments/b31g/thou_shalt_not_censor_more_on_the_genius_of_judge/

                      /s/WayOfTheBern/comments/b2vk/judge_rules_biden_administration_likely_trampled/

                      /s/WayOfTheBern/comments/b31w/federal_judge_rules_against_biden_admin_attack_on/

                      /s/WayOfTheBern/comments/b2vk/judge_rules_biden_administration_likely_trampled/

                      [–]Canbot 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                      In the short tine the government had that power they chose to censor the truth. It was a blatant violation of the constitution. They should all have been jailed for such crimes.

                      [–]IkeConn 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

                      NPR is a socialist commie organization.

                      [–]MuskyIndependent 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                      The AGs' argument ties into a larger Republican narrative that conservatives are being censored on social media for their views

                      "Narrative" we all been banned here. This is a triggering article.

                      [–]Feldheld 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

                      Censorship = greatest threat to civilization

                      Root cause = pandemic of cowardice

                      [–]Ferretman 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                      Huzzah!

                      It's not the end of the war, but it's nice to win this particular battle. There will be more.

                      [–]UncleWillard56 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (27 children)

                      It's not the US as a whole, it's the Biden Administration and or the DNC. That's the problem. If this was a unilateral policy to just stop inaccurate information being spread, who would disagree?

                      [–][deleted] 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (26 children)

                      I disagree. No one on earth is capable of saying if everything is inaccurate or not. You could spend trillions of dollars and still only be right 95% of the time.

                      [–][deleted]  (24 children)

                      [deleted]

                        [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (23 children)

                        that is simply a shit take

                        [–][deleted]  (22 children)

                        [deleted]

                          [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (21 children)

                          take it up with elon, eurofag

                          [–][deleted]  (20 children)

                          [deleted]

                            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

                            it's called being a patriot. once upon a time the US was free and not ruled by jews.

                            [–][deleted]  (18 children)

                            [deleted]

                              [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

                              what are we without the rule of law? lost. you are a woman who puts your emotions above the law.

                              [–]UncleWillard56 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

                              I'm not suggesting that. Standards and practices are a thing, and you can do that without silencing dissenting opinions (I'm all for Free Speech, but I refuse to be harassed or threatened, and there are mechanizations to cull that from the platform - banning, muting, etc. - without infringing on those rights). You can publish the best information available and the sources that support it, while still allowing for free discussion.

                              That's NOT what the Biden Administration did. They picked their side and tried, and succeeded, in forcing Twitter to silence any dissent.

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

                              The usual dishonest take from a literal state-run mouthpiece.

                              "We" have become the USSR: Coming soon; the lines in front of empty stores and ten-year waiting lists for new cars and apartments.

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

                              It means the First Amendment still exists.

                              [–]EddieC 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

                              Pinned posts on s/Politics for Accretive Dialogue on Solutions is what we really need to do
                               
                              Else, this forum is just another heatsink
                               
                              u/Axxa
                               

                              [–]AXXA 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

                              You mean an open invitation to discussion but without any links?

                              [–]EddieC 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

                              A Post for

                              • Solutions = the ways out of our quandary
                              • Accretive Dialogue: address bias, blind spots; everyone up to speed & on the same page
                              • Focus (not chatter): Pinned = always at the top of s/Politics, impervious to irrelevant posts
                                 

                              [–]AXXA 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

                              Never in the history of humanity has everybody been on the same page.

                              What quandary? What bias?

                              Note: Pinned posts are only pinned from within the sub itself. For example see /s/SaidIt

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

                              Pinned posts are only pinned from within the sub itself. For example see /s/SaidIt

                              Yes, that is correct. That pinned post is also an example of everybody being put on the same page AND for a solution

                               

                              What quandary? What bias?

                              Political quandary. "Left" - "Right" - "We're all F'ed" bias
                              Distracted & Divided - We Are Ruled
                               

                              One possible way out of our political quandary