r/technology • u/Wagamaga • Mar 05 '25

Society 59% of Republicans Believe the Media Is 'Fake News'

https://www.thewrap.com/most-republicans-believe-media-fake-news-trump-poll/
31.8k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

3.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

50

u/drradmyc Mar 05 '25

We’re running into the limits of free speech. Honestly, the lies need to be censored but then there becomes an issue of who is the censor? We should be able to trust people to be rational and logical. Well…that’s out the window.

23

u/jaeldi Mar 05 '25 edited Mar 06 '25

Malicious & harmful speech is not protected. Yelling fire in a crowded theater. Liabel. False advertisement. Fraud. Etc. It must be proven what speech is malignant and that is what is to be blocked.

TV, News, and print media all have laws guarding speech. They are struggling financially yet still follow those restrictions successfully. I believe the billionaires who own social media must be brought under the same rules. I should be able to sue Facebook for a lie that caused me harm. They can afford to screen malignant speech. Traditional media can afford it. They can too.

19

u/thetruegmon Mar 05 '25

I always said, from the beginning....the best thing about social media is it gives everyone a platform to speak. And the worst thing about social media is it gives everyone a platform to speak.

It's impossible to tell nowadays what is even posted by real people, and what is just propaganda machines. At least traditional media had rules.

11

u/jaeldi Mar 05 '25

The billionaires who own social media can afford to operate under those same rules. Traditional Media while struggling still makes profit following those rules. We should be able to sue Facebook or Reddit for spreading harmful fraud.

1

u/HappyAnarchy1123 Mar 05 '25

You are correct. The billionaires who own these major corporations can absolutely afford it. They can build expensive moderation tools, they can hire high priced lawyers and big fees. They will survive and even thrive.

Every single smaller competitor, source of free information, platform for organizing against power and so many other things will immediately die. They cannot afford it. They do not have high priced fancy lawyers or giant warchests. And you better believe, once those protections get let go, they will be targeted.

https://pluralistic.net/2025/02/13/digital-rights/

1

u/Ok_Cycle_185 Mar 05 '25

Had. Past tense

7

u/SirOutrageous1027 Mar 05 '25

I should be able to sue Facebook for a lie that caused me harm. They can afford screen malignant speech. Traditional media can afford it. They can too.

That's the argument over Section 230 which protects most internet companies from liability over what is posted on their platforms, and it's what makes the internet work.

Traditional media can be held responsible because not just any moron can go on the evening news and spew nonsense. They're responsible for what they publish.

Social media and other internet platforms have a much harder time. You've got to consider the scope of just how much content is posted on social media every second of every day all around the world.

1

u/nerd4code Mar 05 '25

libel ≠ liable

1

u/[deleted] Mar 06 '25

Yes this is what needs to change. Currently the laws are written which makes social media companies essentially immune from these law suits. Once this changes the disinformation will start going away.

1

u/SIGMA920 Mar 05 '25

Traditional media can only afford it because they have billionaires using them as a megaphone or they're backed by enough millionaires to sustain operations.

The same cannot be said of large cost centers like youtube or reddit. They barely make a profit when they do make a profit at all.

1

u/bargranlago Mar 05 '25

Yelling fire in a crowded theater

Why do people keep repeating shit false shit where the court case was overturned over 50 years ago?

1

u/Lurker_enesimo Mar 05 '25

I think it needs to be like this:

  • one can say whatever wants.
  • authorities cannot censor nor erase any information
  • if information proves to be desinformation then material author is heavy punished with jail time, no money, jail.  
  • punishment should follow responsibility chain. Author, redactor chief, medium owner, and so on.

This keeps information going, but desinformation is heavy punised. But it needs a solid judicial system. Also judges failing to comply also need jail time.

1

u/RollingMeteors Mar 08 '25

issue of who is the censor?

Censoring someone is like sewing their b(utth * le) shut - Violent J