MAGAt loses his federal job - eviltoast

Cross posted from Discuit

  • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    How do you construct anti-propaganda laws that can’t be used by bad actors to silence dissent? Genuine question if you have an answer but I don’t think anyone actually does. The only actual counter to propaganda is quality education, which is where the US has been failing dramatically.

    • smayonak@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 hours ago

      So far all anti propaganda laws were passed in totalitarian states to suppress dissidents. But I think a good start would be to look at pre-existing limitations on free speech. Can you shout “fire” in a crowded theater just for funsies? No? Then we’ve already got a public safety caveat in our right to free speech. So you can’t say something that will kill people IF IT IS A LIE. There are also time place and manner restrictions on free speech. So we agree there is a time and place where you can criticize the state. So we sort of believe that during public emergencies, such as during a pandemic, you cannot spread lies about the pandemic.

      There are ways to prove lies.

    • Fedizen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      24 hours ago

      You have to target entities that knowingly lie and portray themselves as serious. Anti fraud laws with teeth.

      • RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        43 minutes ago

        The comment says anti-propaganda laws. I’m 100% in favor of anti-fraud laws, but propaganda is special that it’s not always direct (read as: legally enforcable) lies.

        • Fedizen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          21 minutes ago

          A lot of them are. I think one could argue the news always saying “crime go up” is an easily provable misrepresentation and if the anti fraud laws were strong enough that a city might be able to sue large companies for such a misrepresentation, it could heavily damage the propaganda value.

          Another instance: if people saying a “nobody was arrested for BLM”. Then somebody arrested during BLM should have the right to sue a big outlet like fox news if they repeat the lie.