Is disinformation protected by the 1st Amendment?

[DBCowboy]

Lots of talk from pols about stopping disinformation, misinformation.

I see a trend developing where such claims will enable government(s) to censor.

The only truth will be government sanctioned and approved of, truth!

 " If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear."
George Orwell


So. . . is misinformation protected or not?

[FlyingClayDisk]

Sounds a whole lot like the Ministry of Truth is getting ready to send out the Thought Police to clamp down on "Thoughtcrime", and where reality gets dropped into the ducts of memory holes in favor of "Newspeak".  All that remains is to namechange the the language from English to Ingsoc.

I swear to Gawd, someone has got a copy of Nineteen Eighty-four on their desk as a playbook and roadmap for America.

[UltraBudgie]

Protected is what the people demand be protected and the trend seems pretty clear

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/...nt-online/

Sorry no real fire to rant here more about it got fam in path of hurrycane

[DBCowboy]

Protected is what the people demand be protected and the trend seems pretty clear
[Image: https://denyignorance.com/uploader/image...-53-22.png]
https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/...nt-online/

Sorry no real fire to rant here more about it got fam in path of hurrycane

Hope they stay safe, love the graph!

[Ray1990]

Lots of talk from pols about stopping disinformation, misinformation.

I see a trend developing where such claims will enable government(s) to censor.

The only truth will be government sanctioned and approved of, truth!

 " If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear."
George Orwell


So. . . is misinformation protected or not?

It would probably depend on intent. A bs artist running misinformation campaigns is completely different than the misinformed talking and sharing crap.

I would be more worried about absolute financial ruin if I lived in the US and had a habit of talking complete crap. Once a bs artist is no longer inconsequential there'll be a good chance of them participating in a lawsuit.

I'm hardly an expert on US law although I'd imagine misinformation could happily fall into one of the categories of unprotected speech such as perjury, defamation or even inciting lawlessness.

I can see social media being forced to do more although that doesn't necessarily mean changing the laws for individuals, it would be about more regulation and facilitating already existing laws.

Personally I like reading people's reactions to obvious misinformation, I'd be lying if I didn't admit to how dangerous bs can be though, there's far too many cases of people losing their minds and committing crimes over falsehoods.

Government sanction truth? That's a funny proposal... Governments lose cases in their own courts never mind international ones lol. You'd have already lost quite a few rights just to make such a thing feasible, the right to misinformation would be the least of your worries.

[schuyler]

Yes, it is, though that does not mean you can't sue for libel. However, it does protect, for example "stolen valor" as it is free speech. It protects hyperbole as well. Example: "This is the fastest car on this lot!" To put t in the most simple terms: B.S. is free speech.

[DBCowboy]

It would probably depend on intent. A bs artist running misinformation campaigns is completely different than the misinformed talking and sharing crap.

I would be more worried about absolute financial ruin if I lived in the US and had a habit of talking complete crap. Once a bs artist is no longer inconsequential there'll be a good chance of them participating in a lawsuit.

I'm hardly an expert on US law although I'd imagine misinformation could happily fall into one of the categories of unprotected speech such as perjury, defamation or even inciting lawlessness.

I can see social media being forced to do more although that doesn't necessarily mean changing the laws for individuals, it would be about more regulation and facilitating already existing laws.

Personally I like reading people's reactions to obvious misinformation, I'd be lying if I didn't admit to how dangerous bs can be though, there's far too many cases of people losing their minds and committing crimes over falsehoods.

Government sanction truth? That's a funny proposal... Governments lose cases in their own courts never mind international ones lol. You'd have already lost quite a few rights just to make such a thing feasible, the right to misinformation would be the least of your worries.

Would misinformation be the lie of the Steele Dossier, Hunter's laptop?

 

[Blaine91555]

I can't say that no speech online should ever be changed or removed. Some speech can be hateful or criminal. Bullies targeting kids. Doxxing. Engaging in crimes online. Purposeful lies to cause someone financial or emotional harm.

As far as I can tell, pretty much all politicians lie or dance around issues. It's kind of on us as voters to do our homework and never believe anything until it's verified as fact. Not by a biased fact checker, but by checking it ourselves. Buyer Beware

No government entity other than the courts should ever deal with speech that needs removing. The courts are there to protect us, not partisan politicians.

[FlyingClayDisk]

DB, no, we do not understand what you are saying. 

You have stated that you are a "zionist", even put it in your signature.  Fine.  But how do you argue the wanton killing of ALL people in the region.  Netanyahu has lost his mind. 

Look, I HATE terrorists, but this is akin to wiping out the State of Michigan because you don't like Dearborn. 

I'm sorry, but I don't agree.

It's sad that we cant divorce discussions about terror from every single thing, even a single mention, about Israel.  Yes, that's sad.

I would love to have a rational discussion about the differences between these things, but you will not allow that to happen.  There it is.

[DBCowboy]

DB, no, we do not understand what you are saying. 

You have stated that you are a "zionist", even put it in your signature.  Fine.  But how do you argue the wanton killing of ALL people in the region.  Netanyahu has lost his mind. 

Look, I HATE terrorists, but this is akin to wiping out the State of Michigan because you don't like Dearborn. 

I'm sorry, but I don't agree.

It's sad that we cant divorce discussions about terror from every single thing, even a single mention, about Israel.  Yes, that's sad.

I would love to have a rational discussion about the differences between these things, but you will not allow that to happen.  There it is.

palestinians under the flag of hamas want to kill all jews.

germans, under the nazi flag wanted the same.

QED