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

submitted by YoMamma from npr.org

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]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.