I'm not in favor of this newly created Board, vesuvius, but do you seriously dispute that disinformation is massively on the rise (thanks in large part to social media and idiots who accept it all as gospel and are unwilling or unable to critically think)?
The Disinformation Governance Board--reason #914 to hate Leftists
- Thread starter mushroomgod_1
- Start date
That’s an argument I’ve thought about, but haven’t dug into. I think DHS has some authority over foreign propaganda.
"The current Presidential administration of the United States was using internet companies to limit free speach" Seriously? What a bullshit uninformed partisan post. Question, how is the administration doing this? Because a private company decided to tell a former Prez he can not use Twitter as a vehicle to spread lies and election disinformation. Our freedom of speech does not mean we can just use an internet company to lie and incite violence on a daily basis. Old fat white men should not be using a social media company to spread lies. Let them start their own knock off of Twitter.....
I don’t think legit disinformation is on the rise either. But the willingness of people to dismiss opposing views as disinformation when they really mean disagreement is definitely on the rise.
We have people believing Hugo Chavez, who died almost 10 years ago, had a hand in changing votes in the 2020 election.
Yeah, misinformation is on the rise and people are eating it up.
Yes I think it is on the rise but I have a big problem with who determines what is disinformation and don't trust either side to be right without bias.
Spoken like a good little lie-spreader.
They need true-believers like you to make the right trains run on time.
The issue is obviously public trust, which there is absolutely none of rivals.
Using one of many available wuttabouts but when Desantis announced his 'election police force' or whatever he called it, it was viewed by rivals as yet another obvious move towards his Orbanian vision which includes election control.
How else do you explain it?
I get the anxiety.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/florida-governor-signs-bill-creating-election-police-unit
Again I have no idea how to combat misinformation and deceptive propaganda. We just witnessed a complete shit show over a contagion that killed over a million Americans in two years. That's more than the population of six states.
If we can't get some kind of consensus on something like a contagion in our backyard because of the amount of theories off the internet then yeah, there's not much confidence that we have that ability in this new age of unlimited, undocumented and unverified internet information.
It's probably just a way of life now for future generations to learn to live with.
Using one of many available wuttabouts but when Desantis announced his 'election police force' or whatever he called it, it was viewed by rivals as yet another obvious move towards his Orbanian vision which includes election control.
How else do you explain it?
I get the anxiety.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/florida-governor-signs-bill-creating-election-police-unit
Again I have no idea how to combat misinformation and deceptive propaganda. We just witnessed a complete shit show over a contagion that killed over a million Americans in two years. That's more than the population of six states.
If we can't get some kind of consensus on something like a contagion in our backyard because of the amount of theories off the internet then yeah, there's not much confidence that we have that ability in this new age of unlimited, undocumented and unverified internet information.
It's probably just a way of life now for future generations to learn to live with.
Well, you are correct on only one thing. I am partisan on the side of free speech regardless of who speaks. As to the other part of your statement, you are naive and, obviously, racially biased. You demonstrate little understanding of free speech, its importance to the survival of the United States of America, and the role of internet companies have played in limiting free speech. It is, after all, a complicated issue. You and others like you may present the greatest danger to this country at this time. "If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington.
Great quote you found by George W....around 1776. So no rules you say? Anyone can use a private social media platform for whatever purpose? Russians use of Facebook and Twitter to try and sway our free and fair Presidential elections? No problem you say. Free Speech. Trump uses twitter and Facebook to spread disinformation in attempts to overturn our free and fair elections? No Problem you say. Free Speech. Hey, let's go on Twitter and Facebook and incite a crowd to storm our Nations Capital in order to overturn our free and fair elections. No problem you say. Free Speech.
Sorry, but Free Speach is not a catch all phrase. There can be rules attached. Can I yell "fire" in a crowded movie theater? NO. But in your eyes "free speech" should come with no rules, stipulations, and or exceptions. That's just wrong and poor uneducated logic used by you. So the Constitution says I have the Right to Bear Arms. Can I carry an unlicensed UZI that I bought on some obscure website and walk into your kids school. NO.
Some people in here need to stick to posts concerning IU's poor outside shooting. Your rhetoric is dangerous.
First, I didn't say no rules. Second, I didn't say anyone can use private social media for any reason. Third, I didn't say there aren't problems which are created because of the right of freedom of speech. Fourth, I said nothing whatsoever about gun control (You pulled that out of your butt.)
You probably have never read the First Amendment. You should really should. After doing so, you might also research the history of why freedom of speech (and freedom of the press) was included in the very first Constitutional Amendment. And, if freedom of speech is to be limited, who can be trusted to make the decision regarding what speech is to be allowed and what speech is prohibited? Until you get an understanding of free what speech is and why it needs to be protected, you should take your own advice and stick to posting on IU's poor outside shooting. It's the one thing you got right.
Last edited:
Looks like a young black man is going to fix the young white man’s Twitter. You have a problem with that?
"Legit disinformation?" That's a good one. 🤣
Give me a break - after over 4 years of hearing about how Trump and conservatives are Nazis, you whine about what your "little political podcast" says.
This is the problem - you have no idea the kind of crap you're spouting.
It's going to be hard to come together/work together if you, and others like you, continue to live in your fantasy land.
Last edited:
Yes, it's absolutely not on the 'rise'.
It's been this way for over 6 years - it's just that now information on your guy is coming out and suddenly you are worried about disinformation.
You're late to the party, as usual.
If we just had some legitimate news sources it wouldn't be near the problem but NBC, FOX, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, and all the others have their agenda and I think, in a way, they are more of a problem than the far out places.
I sure don't won't some government agency telling me what's false and what is true. I'd trust Carlson before I would them and I never watch him.
Last edited:
If Q is not Russian disinformation, it certainly exposes how our society can be turned against itself through disinformation. Seems worth having government consider the problem. Almost every function of government could be manipulated, but there are safeguards that have kept that from happening.
Authority often stretches like rubber bands, and doesn’t break. Combating disinformation, in general, with public service ads and fact checking (more speech) could withstand a court challenge, I think. Editorial control over content, clearly won’t, as a 1st amendment violation. It’s the grey area in between that gets interesting. We’d have to read the DHS act to even guess ourselves.
A second aspect could be the lack of a budget item to found and fund such a bureau.
It is clear you are on one side and don't care about another side. I was for the best person until democrats went with Johnson and moved away from the center. I didn't want Nixon but Hubert H. sided with the rioters and didn't stand up to them enough. The Carter administration was inept and the country suffered as a result. Clinton had to run as a "different democrat" and adjust his policies once the midterm election put the republicans in charge for the first time in 40 years. Reagan was the last President able to pull both side together in his second term despite a hostile press. Since then this country has been divided and the press has a big part of that.
Well, there you go.
Hickory would believe a clown over anything a conservative says.
Guessing his dad was one in the circus somewhere. Probably drove one of those tiny cars so it stands to reason
Whether the disinformation is right or left I am against any government involvement.
Look at how partisan things are now. No way we can trust either party to run such a bureau.
All you really need to show hypocrisy is how Dems would react if it was Trump doing the exact same thing.
couldn't agree more.
with literally all corporate media, including MSNBC, CNN, Fox News, talk radio, and all the other networks, being literally a far right propaganda arm of Wall St and the rich, it's no wonder the working class have lost ground for forty plus yrs, the wealth gap keeps getting bigger and bigger, our manufacturing base was off shored with much of the support jobs as well, our pharma prices are so unnecessarilly high it costs lives and life savings, and and no pro working class prez candidate can ever get out of the primaries because the corp media and corp owned DNC flat won't ever allow it, and have the power to stop it..
didn't really expect the Koch Industries' primary board mouthpiece to admit the obvious, but nice to see someone else isn't blind to the reality that literally all CORPORATE media represents Wall St and the investor class all the time, and can never be any other way, and that all mass media is CORPORATE.
any media that's CORPORATE, can only represent CORPORATIONS and the investor class on everything economic.
that whole "CORPORATE" thing, neither can nor will ever allow otherwise.
it's just business. which is literally all it ever can be with CORPORATIONS.
not the fault of those running CORPORATE media. they have no say in the matter, nor ever can long term.
You mean the biggest spreader of disinformation? And before you jump all over me how can you deny it when daily he talks about a stolen election that never was? If you believe him, then you don’t belong in this conversation.
We need to see all the emails and tweets that have passed between Twitter and Facebook and the Democrats in DC since January 20, 2020. You OK with that?
Just to be clear, I liked your earlier post and don't believe you're in need of a conservatorship.
Good one.
(Do you have a ten year-old kid who's gotten hold of your login credentials?)
Damn autocorrect ...... There are 3 or 4 words that my phone will automatically change to something else (android)... is there a way to correct that?
Another is granddaughter's ... it will always change it to granddaughters.
Last edited:
Apparently you do. I didn't make the first childish statement , I merely responded to yours.
Similar threads
