Controlling media and having a fact-checker pop up are two different things. Let people spout their nonsense, but flag sources of misinformation as unreliable.
He was just a Fledditor. Living in a Lemmy woooorld.
Controlling media and having a fact-checker pop up are two different things. Let people spout their nonsense, but flag sources of misinformation as unreliable.
Very interesting “democracy or philosipher-king” point, though maybe another option in between is possible. I believe it is people’s responisibility to self govern and that noone has the right to take that away. I don’t want people to be told what to think, but I also don’t trust them in our current system. I’m saying we need an apolitical tool for flagging lies to help people not accept everything that fits their current worldview. Also, on your point later in the comment chain, I firmly believe elected officials should be suspended and imprisoned if they call for violence and then someone else performs that violence. Rhetoric has power and using that irresponsibly shouldn’t go unpunished. Majority rule with respect to the minority is my most important principle.
Nah bruv, as an american, the people are too dumb to not need some sort of protection from hate speech and ideas. A fact checker needs to be a mandatory public service at this point. I feel the same way about the homeless bum who shouts at everyone downtown that their participation in consummerism is destroying everything. If they called for violence, it would be a step too far.
I’m not who you asked, but I often think of supression tactics against forms of free speech used in the US that some countries in the EU do less. Not all of them (UK online speech policing and arrests as a counterexample), but voter supression, union busting, and law enforcement response to protests have been handled in various countries in ways I consider more free for the citizens.
TLDR: Intimidation tactics and biased response happens less in other countries.