Reddit Responds To Calls From Moderators To Fight Disinformation (vice.com) 331
An anonymous reader shares a report: Some of the most popular subreddits are protesting the proliferation of COVID-19 disinformation and conspiracy theories on the platform. Moderators from several high profile subreddits, including r/awww, r/showerthoughts, and r/pics, are now calling on the site to do a better job of curbing the spread of disinformation. "It is clear that even after promising to tackle the problem of misinformation on this site, nothing of substance has been done aside from quarantining a medium sized subreddit, which barely reduces traffic and does little to stop misinformation," user N8theGr8 posted said in a post announcing the protests, which lists dozens of subreddits who had signed on in solidarity.
Reddit pushed back 8 hours later with a post from CEO Steve Huffman in r/announcements. It didn't mention the thread specifically, but there's little doubt it was a response to calls to ban subreddits that spread disinformation. Huffman began by saying the CDC was the best source of up to date information about the pandemic and urged people to get vaccinated. "We appreciate that not everyone agrees with the current approach to getting us all through the pandemic, and some are still wary of vaccinations," Huffman said. "Dissent is a part of Reddit and the foundation of democracy. Reddit is a place for open and authentic discussion and debate. This includes conversations that question or disagree with popular consensus. This includes conversations that criticize those that disagree with the majority opinion. This includes protests that criticize or object to our decisions on which communities to ban from the platform."
Reddit pushed back 8 hours later with a post from CEO Steve Huffman in r/announcements. It didn't mention the thread specifically, but there's little doubt it was a response to calls to ban subreddits that spread disinformation. Huffman began by saying the CDC was the best source of up to date information about the pandemic and urged people to get vaccinated. "We appreciate that not everyone agrees with the current approach to getting us all through the pandemic, and some are still wary of vaccinations," Huffman said. "Dissent is a part of Reddit and the foundation of democracy. Reddit is a place for open and authentic discussion and debate. This includes conversations that question or disagree with popular consensus. This includes conversations that criticize those that disagree with the majority opinion. This includes protests that criticize or object to our decisions on which communities to ban from the platform."
That's a stretch.. (Score:5, Insightful)
"Reddit is a place for open and authentic discussion and debate."
It may be a place for authentic, but is most infamous for the opposite.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, I'd even put 4chan ahead of Reddit for debate. Not only does giving everyone a vote on every comment promote circle-jerking, there is also a culture of burying differing opinions or even different expressions of concurring opinions. Even dealing with anonymous trolls is better than that.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Reddit is like /. with everyone having mods points, including anonymous cowards.
At least on /. the down-modding does tend to be used more for trolling or spamming, on reddit it's downvote = disagree. The irony is many of these subs claim to be against censorship and prejudice, yet will happily censor their own communities posts for not corresponding to their own prejudices.
Shame as there's a lot of clever folk there, but it kills real discussion a lot of the time.
Cannons don't work against mosquitos (Score:2)
If you shut down one subreddit, then trolls will just try another. Policing has to be done on a per-message basis.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, the experiment was already tested on Reddit in the past.
If you nuke subreddits, a lot of their regulars end up leaving. Some might stick around, but if they're forced into subreddits that don't agree with the viewpoint of the banned one, they don't get to continue doing the same thing they were doing there.
A bonus side-effect is that all the worst people tend to end up in the same alternative site, such as Voat, until it collapses under its own weight.
Yeah right.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Yeah right.... (Score:4, Insightful)
apparently that's just not relegated to reddit.
Re:Yeah right.... (Score:5, Insightful)
"Dissent is a part of Reddit and the foundation of democracy. " What a load of bull. Try posting something thats not remotely agreeable to the left and watch yourself get downvoted to oblivion, hiding your comment, draining your karma, or the mods will just outright ban yo
None of those are a function of Reddit itself, but a function of the users and moderators (mods are not Reddit employees or admins, they are users who happened to create a sub or who have been promoted to moderator in that sub).
But you knew that, didn't you?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Reddit controls how reddit works.
Sure, but Reddit doesn't control how Reddit is used anymore than Facebook controls how Facebook is used. Facebook Admits It Was Used to Incite Violence in Myanmar [nytimes.com]
Re:Yeah right.... (Score:4, Informative)
Sure it's true. Get downvoted because you aren't part of the groupthink of a discussion ? Start you own subreddit, hell you'll be a mod in there and can boot people who don't agree with you. That's how open reddit is. If you don't like a discussion you are free to make a whole kingdom for yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Even as I right-wing Republican voter . . . I have to agree.
The structure of Reddit is a bit odd. The platform as a whole does have a left lean, but that certainly can change from one sub-reddit to another, with some subs being right-wing/conservative/etc, and others have a left-wing/liberal/etc lean. All depends on who starts a particularly sub-reddit and assigns the moderators.
That's mostly just the userbase though. Reddit as an entity mostly is politically neutral, which is why I'd agree with their CE
Re: (Score:3)
Like r/news where the majority of articles are from Left sources: https://ground.news/blindspott... [ground.news]
and r/firearms an example on the other side: https://ground.news/blindspott... [ground.news]
Okay, maybe we didn't really need a tool for us to know the political biases, but I like that there is a data-driven methodology to confirm that some sub-reddits are really failing to allow multiple viewpoints. Come to
Re: (Score:2)
This site has that problem too, though to a lesser extent.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Disinformation - or just want they want known (Score:5, Insightful)
The Disinformation definition has become - anything we don't want the public to know, 1984 style. It has nothing to do with actual data that critical thinkers can then use to make an informed judgment for themselves.
Re:Disinformation - or just want they want known (Score:5, Interesting)
It has nothing to do with actual data that critical thinkers can then use to make an informed judgment for themselves.
Internet randos are not critical thinkers. They just play one on the Internet. People on Reddit are not thinking critically and making informed judgements. They're posting dank memes and snickering like Muttley about it. For the lulz.
The naive dreamers who invented the Internet thought it would enable a fantastical sharing of knowledge for the benefit of all mankind. Some of that happened. A very tiny bit of it in a sea of bullshit (and porn). The dumbest 20% of humanity are absolute fuckwits and now their total lack of understanding of all of reality is on display, because they're the loudest and most persistent.
I'm not speaking figuratively here. I'm talking about literally stupid people, people for whom basic algebra is a Dark Art, who have difficulty reading and comprehending a sentence as long as this one. These idiots used to be buried in the larger bulk of humanity, and they swept the floors and stocked the shelves and weren't allowed to operate machinery and the small number of people who could hear their dumb ideas could easily mock them into silence. Now the Internet has allowed them to find each other and form little Enclaves of Idiocy where they reinforce each other's wildly inaccurate "hot takes", telling each other how clever they are to have discovered the truth. And not a gleam of reality ever intrudes to disrupt their little balls of fear and loathing and their vast gulf of misunderstanding.
Not all opinions are valid. Not all people are smart. Many of those who wander are lost. Deep stupidity is not reached by the light. (With apologies to J.R.R. Tokien.)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The Disinformation definition has become - anything we don't want the public to know, 1984 style. It has nothing to do with actual data that critical thinkers can then use to make an informed judgment for themselves.
Not really. People just tell you this because they are spreading disinformation and are attempting to deflect their critics.
Re:Disinformation - or just want they want known (Score:4, Insightful)
Wrong. Disinformation is anything that is factually incorrect. Claiming that vaccines contain microchips is not valid dissent. It's prevarication, lying, dissembling. Dissent, it is NOT.
Reddit is Rightly Wary (Score:3, Interesting)
Reddit sees the not-too-distant halving of value of the other social media companies and is wisely steering clear.
Respectable (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
I think the vast masses have proven that they prefer safety to freedom.
Re: (Score:3)
...as if they're mutually exclusive.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Respectable (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Read between the lines
You mean "interpret things in a way that fit my worldview"?
And yes, sure, you certainly COULD call it coercion for a private business to require people to wear a mask or prove their vaccination status. Much in the way that I'm coerced to wear a shirt and shoes when I go in their store.
Jannies want more janitoring, shocking. (Score:3)
Preface: Covid is real, it's not a bioweapon, masks help, vaccines are safe and work.
That said, why is more moderation the answer? Has more moderation helped with literally any problem?
This just seems like the sort of good-intentioned but malignantly-idiotic whining that leads to a draconian environment where everyone has to scan their driver's license to get their one and only lifetime account. See: Facebook.
Re: (Score:2)
You make a preface that the U.S. government and other world agencies are investigating. Unknown if covid in fact leaked from Chinese biowar lab, unknown if animal origin. So, are your or I spreading misinformation to say one way or the other?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world... [bbc.com]
Re: (Score:2)
See... when you link all of those statements as one large combined fact, you risk causing doubt for the parts of your statement that are true if any of of what you wrote turns out false.
Re: (Score:2)
To add onto what Iggy stated:
vaccines are safe and work.
https://www.chop.edu/centers-p... [chop.edu]
Vaccines aren't always safe, and don't always work. There are vaccines that in a percentage of people caused autoimmune diseases. Being concerned about the safety of any vaccine is not misinformation. There have been vaccines that these side effects did not show up for years.
There actually was an outbreak of Guillain Barre Syndrome that was likely tied to the Swine Flu vaccine.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesaf... [cdc.gov]
Even with all of this, I went out
Re: (Score:2)
You can recognize the people who want to control you because the first solution they think of to the problem is censorship. There are other solutions to the problem.
Profitability of Outrage (Score:3)
Disinformation (we used to call these lies), conspiracy theories, and general trolling are profitable when revenue generation is based on views (advertising). We've known the effect trolling had on engagement since the days of bulletin boards. Reddit and platforms like it will either just pay lip service to cleaning it up, or will hide under the guise of democracy as long as it has no impact to the popularity of the platform (and hence their revenue).
In short Reddit will do nothing unless readership drops (it won't) or they are legislated into it. And neither will anybody else.
Remember when we used to wonder what the world would be like if everybody was connected to the Internet and had a voice? Now we know.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, you have authoritative source on what is disinformation or not? Seems the governments of this world and their health agencies make claims and walk them back.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world... [bbc.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, you have authoritative source on what is disinformation or not? Seems the governments of this world and their health agencies make claims and walk them back.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world... [bbc.com]
Well, I'd start with "you'll be magnetized" "Pills meant for cattle can cure you" At least with health agencies they are basing recommendations on the data at hand, not wild speculation or anecdotal evidence. Of course, when the evidence points in a different direction all of a sudden "they were lying..."
Re: (Score:3)
Pills meant for cattle: if you want to keep emergency stash of antibiotics for a major disaster, farm animal supply is the only option. ooo, no prescription. illegal. advanced knowledge needed to dose properly... but, some smart people do it.
Our CDC is two months or more late with info (delta and other strains, virus load on vaccinated individuals) that other better staffed country's health agencies already knew. That's near misinformation levels of badness and incompetence.
Dissent (Score:5, Interesting)
Says the guy that locked the comments.
Where are we really headed? (Score:3)
Let's face it, open and honest discussion online is likely a thing of the past. With calls from all sides to digitally curb-stomp anybody that's saying something some group disagrees with, and more and more large sites clamping down on speech they disagree with, the echo chambers that are left in the wake do nothing but increase the animosity between groups and isolate those groups in feedback loops of like-minded individuals. And I'm not saying that's all one one group of individuals. It seems to be universal at this point.
So where are we gonna end up? We're already seeing the common discourse level in real life get as toxic as online discourse. Will we eventually have to actually physically be separated from those we disagree with to prevent actual violence rather than just taunting, teasing and harassment? It's gotten bad enough lately that I have coworkers referring to me as a sheep for getting vaccinated and screaming slurs at those of us that dare to wear masks in public. And these are people I've worked with for over twenty years and have been on friendly terms with most of that time.
Is it possible to reverse course or are we so entrenched in our hatred of others that we're incapable of treating each other humanely? I don't know, but I'm getting very tired of hearing that we need to clamp down on free speech every time somebody hears something they disagree with. And yeah, I know, there's some seriously wild shit being posted online. But that type of nonsense has always existed. We relied on people in the past to sort out the crazy, stupid and dangerous stuff for themselves. Unfortunately, it seems like critical thinking is in super short supply, and the crazy is taking a much more firm footing.
This is all going to end up in the lawbooks at some point. It'll keep escalating until we're asking the government to filter everything we witness. It's freakin' embarrassing to be a part of the human race right now. I wish I could have been a part of it while we were climbing up out of the dirt and trying to make something better of ourselves. Seems like now too many are far more interested in throwing their neighbors back in the dirt just because, not realizing that we're all being drug down to the same place because of it.
I'm rambling. I guess it's just depressing.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah for the days of anonymous posting on USENET.
TL;DR Version (Score:3)
They punted.
The problem with Reddit (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the problem we have now with reddit is that we have people screaming that "disinformation" needs to be banned. But "disinformation" is what they consider disinformation. For example, there is a new study out of Canada that does a bunch of number crunching and experimentation and says:
They recommend N95/KN95 masks and good room ventilation as the best defense against COVID-19
I read the whole paper and there some really good science to back up all their claims.
Well, a lot of this goes against current CDC guidelines. And if you link to the paper on Reddit, the downvote brigade will destroy you and you'll be reported. A lot of these people treat emerging science about COVID-19 as evil.
I think it's everyone's job to do what they can to end the pandemic. But there's a LOT of people talking about rouding up unvaccinated people and just shooting them.
It's very hard to have a civil discussion on Reddit these days.
Re:The problem with Reddit (Score:4, Insightful)
It was the same last year. I'd post studies that showed that covid (original) was less harmful to kids than the seasonal flu each year. The seasonal flu where kids still go to school unmasked, and some of them die. I'd get downvoted anywhere, yet it was just statistics. It's amazing how many people don't like facts when those facts don't line up with their preconceived worldview.
Re: (Score:3)
The study (if it is real, haven't seen a link yet) puts numbers of certain measures. These numbers can be used to take targetted measures to lower the spread and keep it from becoming exponential (R > 1). Even a 10% effect can change an exponential growth scenario to one where the number of infections slowly dies down. Combined with other measures (which often will compound) you can avoid scenarios like we've seen all over the world with overloaded hospitals and people dying because of something as si
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Want to provide a link to this study?
He's likely referring to this study that's been in the news lately:
https://aip.scitation.org/doi/... [scitation.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Stupid People Gonna Stupid (Score:2)
Reading and seeing misinformation and conspiracy theories being spread on social media left me feeling sad and pessimistic, which turned to anger.
I ended up removing the apps from my phone and not visiting their websites.
The only person I can control is myself. As for others, I refer you to the Subject line.
Re: (Score:2)
It's all well and good, until one of these stupid people kills you or someone you love. Or until hords of stupid people, manipulated and riled up by disinformation controlled by foreign ennemy nations, do something really really stupid like trying to storm the Capitol building, or worse, start a civil war that kills millions.
Do these people have no forthought? (Score:2)
They are begging for someone to duct tape their mouth shut.
My argument (Score:2)
If I have a question about how to go about taxes, or voting, or doing a permit for some property, or great ways to lose weight, or really anything that I actually want a serious answer to, I typically go to an expert on the matter in real life. So my question is, why does anyone take anything on social media seriously? Like if I walk up to some random stranger and ask what's the best way to prevent getting a viral infection, some really off the fucking wall response shouldn't be unexpected. In fact, that
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Lies and misinformation are not dissent.
Aiding and abetting the spread of lies and misinformation, resulting in the deaths of thousands, is not dissent.
Dig2? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm personally just fine with this... as long as I am the one getting to decide what's a lie and what isn't.
I mean, far be it from me to question the credentials of those who moderate major subreddits for *checks notes* pretty pictures & half-baked ideas, but I'm clearly more trustworthy and anyone who says otherwise should be censored for spreading misinformation.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You know you're living in interesting times when the fascists are defending free speech and liberals are trying to shut it down.
Re:Dig2? (Score:4)
You know you're living in interesting times when the fascists are defending free speech and liberals are trying to shut it down.
Leftist subversion is funny like that.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
"You said X in 2018!"
"It wasn't offensive in 2018!"
"Fuck you, it was always offensive, you should know better that it was Y!"
>Years later
"You said Y in 2023!"
"It wasn't offensive in 2023!"
"Fuck you, it was always offensive!"
Schenck is obsolete (Score:3)
> Yelling fire in a crowded theater isn't legal, why is doing the same thing online?
Because your quote comes from a ruling (Schenck v. United States) that was made obsolete by Brandenburg v. Ohio.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater [wikipedia.org]
Currently it's only possible to criminalize imminent lawless action [wikipedia.org], i.e.
"Advocacy of force or criminal activity does not receive First Amendment protections if (1) the advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action, and (2) i
Re:Dissent on Reddit (Score:4, Interesting)
Who knew that people would end up insisting on the creation of a Mistry of Truth?
Re: (Score:3)
This is how democracy dies: with applause.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm trying to remember a lie that Trump told that I actually care about, one not related to his ego. I'm sure there are some, but most importantly he did not lie as an excuse to start lengthy and expensive wars.
"they hate us for our freedoms" -- Bush
"If I had a son, he'd look like Treyvon Martin" -- Obama
These are example of profound lies; damned lies that had actual repercussions for the nation. To be fair, please provide an equivalent.
Re:Dissent on Reddit (Score:4, Insightful)
"Joe Biden didn't win the election" ring any bells?
Re: Dissent on Reddit (Score:3, Informative)
"Trump is Putin's stooge" - and a million permutations.
"Trump admitted he groped women" and a million permutations
"Trump said white supremacists were very fine people" and a million permutations
"The 2016 election was hacked" and a million permutations.
Ring any bells?
Funny, I don't think one side has a monopoly on bullshit dishonest narratives.
Re: (Score:3)
Please provide me an example of the politician that does not lie.
Please provide me an example of any politico that when put under intense scrutiny, that flaws in their ethics, morality, honesty, "character", cannot be detected, cannot be blown out of proportion, and cannot be used as a diversion by a likewise utterly dishonest opposition.
You can't. You chose to focus on trivial matters because whatever tribalist echo chamber you dragged yourself out of made you very very angry, such that you felt it necessa
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And what stops one group from redefining anything they don't agree with as "lies and misinformation"?
Re:disinformation is not protected speech! (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem you will always run into is who gets to decide this?
At the end of the day all the nuance you try and have boils down to we need an arbitrator or truth. Now who do you put in that position that won't be corrupted by that position?
To use a fairly common example. Imagine reddit was round in the 1930 and you had some black people saying the government doesn't want to treat us. They're actually running experiments on us.
Crazy conspiracy level stuff.
Except of course... that is what happened.
https://www.cdc.gov/tuskegee/t... [cdc.gov]
I just don't see any practical way of having any kind of 'arbitrator of truth' no matter the ideal you might have in mind.
For me, yes, I err on the side of freedom of speech. It means people talking up their gods in the public square. It means conspiracy theories. It means people's random ideas and uninformed opinions.
The solution to that is not to control speech. It's to push the institutions knowledge in manners the institution controls (school, government messaging....)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:disinformation is not protected speech! (Score:5, Insightful)
the [Tuskegee] conspiracy didn't require the involvement of the entire worlds political, media and technological powers in order to function.
That is literally what happened.
The only difference is you have the benefit of hindsight.
Censorship is wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
the [Tuskegee] conspiracy didn't require the involvement of the entire worlds political, media and technological powers in order to function.
That is literally what happened.
The only difference is you have the benefit of hindsight.
Censorship is wrong.
And 90 years later the one group that stands out among those hesitant to get a vaccine are black men. This is why. I honestly can't blame them.
Re: (Score:3)
You can recognize those who want to control because they are the ones interested in preventing information from flowing.
You can recognize those who are sincere because they are interested in spreading true information, not censoring.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, excessive freedom leads to oppression [wikipedia.org], so at some point you have to police speech just like everything else if you want to keep people free.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
That's a made up problem. You already know the answer: moderators, and admins, and those moderators and admins need to be picked carefully. Subreddits that pick awful moderators ultimately need to be closed by admins.
Close, but not quite, if it’s just a handful of moderators and admins serving the majority of the Internet then it’s fascism all over again. You need to have highly distributed and decentralized moderation control that is basically democratic in nature - the problem is letting small groups form and self moderate - they will pull what many thought bubble safe space subreddits do and use that control to push an agenda.
I think the solution is to have distributed and democratic moderation, but
Re: (Score:3)
On the contrary, that is actually the biggest problem.
It's much like government, getting the *right* people in the *right position* is the single biggest problem of human organization.
Who gets to decide what groups have good moderators. Who are these admins who get to decide when moderators are bad?
These are not trivial questions.
Do you go with a more authoritarian model where some powerful person/group can override everything? What stops that group from becoming ideological like a theocracy or corrupt?
Do y
I think the solution is easy (Score:3)
What I'm seeing with the people I know who've gone down the conspiracy route is that they don't have access to medical care except if you include the emergency room. So when they're hurt they show up at the ER and get charged a massive amount of money for not that much
Re:disinformation is not protected speech! (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually...it is.
If it isn't, they who decides what is/isn't a lie? Something you disagree with? Something you believe to be untrue? Who decides?
We've already seem things during the pandemic that were deemed lies and misinformation, only to have them pretty much vetted now.
Masks? Faucchi early on said they weren't needed (doesn't matter his reasoning), later they were valid.
Now, we have studies recently debating if the common surgical masks really do enough to be worth wearing. I saw this on different shows and news reports and channels last night.
Those early on saying covid very possibly escaped from a Chinese virology lab were deemed "misinformation" and racist, etc.
Well, turns out, US govt backed evidence is saying that it is quite possible this is where it came from.
There are doctors out there that are trying to get approval for and attention to potential treatments for covid (those that already have it)...and they are ignored, shouted down, etc....by those that think ONLY the vaccine is the cure to our societies problems with this virus.
What's the next mistruth that is vetted and turns out to be important.
Who is the all knowing oracle that says "This is a lie"?
You know, we didn't for a long time believe the US Govt was experimenting with LSD and other nasty things on unsuspecting citizens back in the day...till documents leaked.
Yesterdays crack can be...tomorrows unimaginable but TRUTH.
I'd rather have someone rambling about flat earth and covid chips in vaccines than to possibly stifle someone who may actually come across something that we hadn't thought of OR something that a powerful person, company, govt was trying to keep quite or steer thought about.
It happens.
Re: (Score:2)
What's the next mistruth that is vetted
Honestly we can simply start with all of your posts, that will keep us busy for a long time.
Re: (Score:3)
"I Won't take the Vaccine because the government is trying to poison us, or track us with 5g chips" then you are posting disinformation.
Government's and corporations do lie. It is naïve to assume they don't.
I don't think their is poison or 5g chips in the covid vaccine, but I am all for people being able to sound the alarm that there might be. One day, the alarm might actually be real but by then you will have outlawed people's ability to whistle blow or announce these things.
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think their is poison or 5g chips in the covid vaccine, but I am all for people being able to sound the alarm that there might be. One day, the alarm might actually be real but by then you will have outlawed people's ability to whistle blow or announce these things.
Why would you want that? Have you never heard the parable of the boy who cried wolf? Did you fail to understand its lesson?
Constant spurious alarm sounding inures humans to the sound of the alarm until they don't believe it. Then the wolf eats the sheep and the little boy who thought it was fun to lie about a menace to the sheep which was real but not present.
Allowing idiots to constantly sound bullshit alarms over and over is quite literally dangerous. Eventually it makes it impossible to distinguish t
Re:disinformation is not protected speech! (Score:4, Insightful)
I am sorry, but posting lies and messages with the intent to deceive people, is not what the founders meant for the freedom of speech.
1) Freedom of speech is about the Government, not about Reddit
2) The Founders were responding to the persecution of people publishing political "broadsides," newspapers full of hyperbole and outright lies. It is definitely what they meant.
Freedom of speech is a principle. (Score:3)
No. The First Amendment to the US Constitution is about the government. Freedom of speech is one of several principles expressed in and protected by the First Amendment. The principle itself does not contain any implication about who it applies to, but the Constitution's scope is limited to the government, so that is where it applies. The underlying principle is ideological, and its merit outside of legal contexts is a matter of open debate.
Ther
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I am sorry, but posting lies and messages with the intent to deceive people, is not what the founders meant for the freedom of speech.
Anybody can talk about the weather in Cuba or North Korea. Do they have freedom of speech?
Freedom of speech at its very core means "freedom to say stuff that other people don't like".
Re:What's with all the fascists and censorship? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:What's with all the fascists and censorship? (Score:4, Insightful)
"Spread of disinformation" is the new newspeak.
Censorship is how you end up with 1984.
Re:What's with all the fascists and censorship? (Score:5, Insightful)
Spread of Disinformation is definitely a thing; if it wasn't, the USA would be more than 50% vaccinated.
'Nuff Said.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Even the person you replied to was spreading untruth and disinformation.
Re: (Score:2)
WRONG.
1. Spread of disinformation is a thing. That's how any fact is spread, correct or incorrect.
2. The USA is currently 50% vaccinated. That is a countable, verifiable and replicatable figure.
No truths were damaged in the posting of my information. Contrary to what you trolls might think or say, you can't combat facts. You can lie and continue to deny the truth, but it just makes you look ridiculous.
Nope, I'm spreading truth and information, not the opposite as you trolls would have others believe. I
Re: (Score:2)
More than 50% of the USA is fully vaccinated, a lot more have one vaccine [mayoclinic.org].
You just spread disinformation: your rights should now be taken away, and you should be thrown into prison.
That is the world you want to create with censorship.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean I wasn't correct ENOUGH for you? Thank you for making my point! I think I'm done here...
Re: (Score:2)
Spread of Disinformation is definitely a thing; if it wasn't, the USA would be more than 50% vaccinated.
'Nuff Said.
The US is more than 50% vaccinated. Really, the US doesn't much stick out:
https://www.nytimes.com/intera... [nytimes.com]
Switzerland, that bastion of Trump support, has the same rate.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Joe is not evil. But Q is.
Re: (Score:2)
Is Joe a liar?
Yes. Q has been telling him demonstrably false things for years. Joe could get in his truck and drag his trucknuts halfway across the country and visit that pizza parlor Q has been telling him about and see for himself that it doesn't have a basement. Joe DID do that. And made national news for brandishing a weapon. Q is a proven liar, even to Joe. Joe continuing to repeat Q's lies is therefore a lie. Joe knows better. Joe doesn't care.
Is he trying to cause misery and death?
Yes. Joe is fundamentally tribal. He's been steeped in a triba