But who determines what is Disinformation?

[Seatard]

I disagree - it is far too slippery a slope to even start on

I mean didn't you say above that the people should determine what is disinformation?

We were discussing the singular question of if the government has any legitimate role in disseminating information.

I'm surprised at the response of "no" because of how deeply involved the government is at every level with issues like health, education, regulation, etc. that are all information based.

If the response is "yes" then the government becomes one of many sources of info that we as individuals use to judge the quality of information we're presented with.

[jtaylor2010]

Ideally, our government and media would be reliable sources. But we're right to be skeptical and it's up to each of us individually to satisfy our skepticism.

And yet you say this….

would it be wrong for the government to let everyone know it's bullchit and should be disregarded?

So which is it… is our government untrustworthy or should we turn to them to tell us what to believe? You could’ve at least waited until we hit a new page of the discussion before such a large contradiction.

[JoshSP1985]

I disapprove of a censorship board. I also disapprove of retarded antivaxxers and dudes like Alex Jones. But remember, once you hand the govt the power to decide truth, science dies. Let people like Alex Jones rant and sue them if they cause damage. There will always be idiots screeching. Over 80% of the country got jabbed. Clearly, most people dgaf what retards say. And rightly so.

Wait 80% taking an experimental jab that was pointless of which you have zero recourse for damages is a good thing?

[Bushmaster]

We were discussing the singular question of if the government has any legitimate role in disseminating information.

I'm surprised at the response of "no" because of how deeply involved the government is at every level with issues like health, education, regulation, etc. that are all information based.

If the response is "yes" then the government becomes one of many sources of info that we as individuals use to judge the quality of information we're presented with.

Health you say?

Why yes, 'tard. It did!

Under Government Pressure, Twitter Suppressed Truthful Speech About COVID-19
https://reason.com/2023/01/02/under-...bout-covid-19/

New ‘Twitter files’ allege Biden administration worked with Twitter to control COVID conversation
https://www.thecentersquare.com/nati...c7adc40e8.html

Biden admin pushed to bar Twitter users for COVID ‘disinformation,’ files show
https://nypost.com/2022/12/26/biden-...isinformation/

The White House asks Twitter to censor Robert Kennedy, Jr., a known critic of the White House’s COVID-19 narrative
The White House directs ******** to shut down conservative voices Tucker Carlson and Tomi Lahren
https://ago.mo.gov/home/news/2023/01...sorship-scheme

Twitter labelled scientific reporting of COVID-19 as “misinformation”
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/202.../eycb-a27.html

The White House and Twitter Censorship
There's new evidence that Biden officials wanted the site to ban Alex Berenson.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-a...ia-11660335186

And on, and on...

Btw, notice I didn't post anything about them censoring Hunter Biden stories? I know that's a touchy subject with you libs so I thought we'd just stick to covid. You're welcome.

You're trying to make the assumption that "government" is some altruistic.. something that can always be trusted completely and thoroughly 100% of the time with never any agenda.

[jtaylor2010]

As bad as I hate to agree with wincel, he's exactly right.

Ukraine is a prime example.. Hundreds of billions in US taxpayer $$ is being shoveled into that shiithole, with seemingly no questions asked. And it's not just the CIA that's very good at bullshiiting people either.. Politicians literally spend their entire careers doing one thing and then putting a completely different happy face on it for public consumption.

That's where the media is *Supposed* to come in.. Only "media" is now apparently synonymous with government though.

5 years ago you couldn’t find a single article on the Ukraine that didn’t highlight how corrupt they were, and now pretty much every news article involving the Ukraine explains why it’s a good thing we’re sending them hundreds of billions of dollars.

[TaiMaiSchutze]

5 years ago you couldn’t find a single article on the Ukraine that didn’t highlight how corrupt they were, and now pretty much every news article involving the Ukraine explains why it’s a good thing we’re sending them hundreds of billions of dollars.

To be fair, they are at war. The real crime is our press burying the nazification of Ukraine. The original injustice that led to this fiasco was Ukraine insisting on violently culturally repressing the Russians in Donbass. Poroshenko allowed neonazi "volunteers" to shell his own citizens, and he pinned medals on their chests and celebrated Bandera. And they burned people alive in Odessa. The nazis are the reason Zelensky couldn't make peace. Putin didn't pull the nazi angle out of his butthoel. There are really nazis in Ukraine. A lot of them. And they are influential enough to scare Russia.

[Seatard]

The govt already censors a crapton of info using google, youtube, etc. Making it official would be a terrible thing and invite even more abuse.

See how they managed to bury Sy Hersch's report on Nord Stream attack. They also buried the Ukrainian biolab info.

The underlying tenet pointed out in my first post ITT is that the government can ask anything they want, but we can always say no.

What I've seen with this issue so far is that it's google, youtube, twitter, etc. who are making business decisions regarding their product. What's involved in making those decisions varies, and it often involves considering the government's position, but at the end of the day as long as each company retained the ability to exercise their right to say no, then it's not government censorship.

[TaiMaiSchutze]

The underlying tenet pointed out in my first post ITT is that the government can ask anything they want, but we can always say no.

What I've seen with this issue so far is that it's google, youtube, twitter, etc. who are making business decisions regarding their product. What's involved in making those decisions varies, and it often involves considering the government's position, but at the end of the day as long as each company retained the ability to exercise their right to say no, then it's not government censorship.

The Twitter files revealed it isn't just private decisionmaking tho. The govt is actively conducting an organized campaign to influence these companies. If the FBI shows up and throws wieght around, people will cave and do what they say. It's literal Gestapo chit and it needs to stop. This is America. If we lose this, we lose everything. Any appearance of govt interference must be shutdown immediately. We already know the govt partners with them to steal data as revealed in wikileaks. We don't need them to be censoring us too.

[jtaylor2010]

The underlying tenet pointed out in my first post ITT is that the government can ask anything they want, but we can always say no.

What I've seen with this issue so far is that it's google, youtube, twitter, etc. who are making business decisions regarding their product. What's involved in making those decisions varies, and it often involves considering the government's position, but at the end of the day as long as each company retained the ability to exercise their right to say no, then it's not government censorship.

Well I don’t really like the marriage of big business and big government, and history seems to indicate that the middle and lower class almost always get screwed when those two work together. Traditionally liberals have been opposed to this as well. Something seems to have changed over the past 10-15 years though.

Do you honestly think these corporations are working with govt. because they think it’s the right thing to do? No, they are doing it because the corporations(and politicians) stand to benefit from it.

[Bushmaster]

The underlying tenet pointed out in my first post ITT is that the government can ask anything they want, but we can always say no.

What I've seen with this issue so far is that it's google, youtube, twitter, etc. who are making business decisions regarding their product. What's involved in making those decisions varies, and it often involves considering the government's position, but at the end of the day as long as each company retained the ability to exercise their right to say no, then it's not government censorship.

Ok now try this...

What IF the government paid these companies to manipulate and suppress data?

Government paid Twitter millions of dollars to censor info from the public
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/...673473?lang=en

Government is still censoring info 'tard. And sugarcoating it under a layer of "Well so what, they all still had the right to say no" doesn't change anything.

[TaiMaiSchutze]

Well I don’t really like the marriage of big business and big government, and history seems to indicate that the middle and lower class almost always get screwed when those two work together. Traditionally liberals have been opposed to this as well. Something seems to have changed over the past 10-15 years though.

Do you honestly think these corporations are working with govt. because they think it’s the right thing to do? No, they are doing it because the corporations(and politicians) stand to benefit from it.

Then why vote Republican? They fuking opened the door to this more than anything. Granted, now the dems are milking it more, but this is literally all Bush's fault.

[Cleveland33]

The underlying tenet pointed out in my first post ITT is that the government can ask anything they want, but we can always say no.

What I've seen with this issue so far is that it's google, youtube, twitter, etc. who are making business decisions regarding their product. What's involved in making those decisions varies, and it often involves considering the government's position, but at the end of the day as long as each company retained the ability to exercise their right to say no, then it's not government censorship.

and my underlying point is that the government should not be asking at all.

do you not see how Orwellian that is?

[jtaylor2010]

Ok now try this...

What IF the government paid these companies to manipulate and suppress data?

Government paid Twitter millions of dollars to censor info from the public
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/...673473?lang=en

Government is still censoring info 'tard. And sugarcoating it under a layer of "Well so what, they all still had the right to say no" doesn't change anything.

Let me give it a shot:



Well as long as the companies had the ability to turn down the money then it isn’t really censorship.








And if that isn’t doing it for you then try this on “just lol at thinking a multibillion dollar company is going to be swayed by a few million”.

[TaiMaiSchutze]

Ok now try this...

What IF the government paid these companies to manipulate and suppress data?

Government paid Twitter millions of dollars to censor info from the public
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/...673473?lang=en

Government is still censoring info 'tard. And sugarcoating it under a layer of "Well so what, they all still had the right to say no" doesn't change anything.

Yea and imagine if they didn't take the payment. Oops an IRS investigation.

Look at what happened to Trump. Nobody has ever been this sandbagged. They are throwing everything they can at him to get him for anything. Anything to stop him from taking the foreign policy establishment down.

Russiagate turned out to be a total farce. Everyone should be infuriated with our intel community. Yet the press is silent.

These are some scary G men we are talking about. Remember dems, the CIA is not your friend. These guys are always 1 hair away from fullblown fascism. They have done unspeakably terrible things in the name of "national security". Do not ever think they are on your team. They will use whatever party is in power to achieve their objectives.

Don't we all find it strange first it was the GOP pushing the PATRIOT ACT and then it was Dems? It's always whoever is in power. They are manipulated and tempted to expand that power. Just remember these people care dick about the constitution and our system is fragile without the balances and rights imposed by it. Neither party should be able to override it unilaterally.

[Bushmaster]

and my underlying point is that the government should not be asking at all.

do you not see how Orwellian that is?

Like Pat.. he probably read 1984 but thought it was porn instead of a dire warning about what could happen lol.

"Dear Penthouse I never thought this would happen to me but while I was toiling away at the ministry of truth..."

[Dingerberry]

To be fair, they are at war. The real crime is our press burying the nazification of Ukraine. The original injustice that led to this fiasco was Ukraine insisting on violently culturally repressing the Russians in Donbass. Poroshenko allowed neonazi "volunteers" to shell his own citizens, and he pinned medals on their chests and celebrated Bandera. And they burned people alive in Odessa. The nazis are the reason Zelensky couldn't make peace. Putin didn't pull the nazi angle out of his butthoel. There are really nazis in Ukraine. A lot of them. And they are influential enough to scare Russia.

Dude I'll Venmo you now for some of the drugs you have....seems like STRONG chit.

[Bushmaster]

Yea and imagine if they didn't take the payment. Oops an IRS investigation.

Look at what happened to Trump. Nobody has ever been this sandbagged. They are throwi g everyrhing they can at him to get him for anything. Anything to stop him from taking the foreign policy establishment down.

Russiagate turned out to be a total farce. Everyone should be infuriated with our intel community. Yet the press is silent.

FML wincel.. reps on recharge lol. Serious.

[Seatard]

The Twitter files revealed it isn't just private decisionmaking tho. The govt is actively conducting an organized campaign to influence these companies. If the FBI shows up and throws wieght around, people will cave and do what they say. It's literal Gestapo chit and it needs to stop. This is America. If we lose this, we lose everything. Any appearance of govt interference must be shutdown immediately. We already know the govt partners with them to steal data as revealed in wikileaks. We don't need them to be censoring us too.

They don't have to cave though, they choose to.

I agree they sometimes shouldn't, but they don't care about any of this chit, they exist to make money.

There are also plenty of examples of companies taking the government to court (or "lobbying" LOL) when they are pushed too far, both when "asked" or required to by law.

[Cleveland33]

Dude I'll Venmo you now for some of the drugs you have....seems like STRONG chit.

an idiot kid that probably has never left his home state is an expert on global nazism

[jtaylor2010]

Then why vote Republican? They fuking opened the door to this more than anything. Granted, now the dems are milking it more, but this is literally all Bush's fault.

Not all, but he was absolutely a train wreck of a president and probably launched a lot of this stuff off the ground. But to your point, the first time I voted was to vote against him so I voted for Kerry in 2004. Didn’t vote for McCain because he is just as bad as Bush or Obama. Didn’t vote for Romney due to the same reason. After 2004 didn’t vote again until I voted for Trump twice, and I still stand by my view that he was much better than Hillary would’ve been, and if he had stayed in office we would be much better off than with this decrepit shell of a man we have now. Sure there were issues with Trump, but overall much better than the alternatives.

[TaiMaiSchutze]

They don't have to cave though, they choose to.

I agree they sometimes shouldn't, but they don't care about any of this chit, they exist to make money.

There are also plenty of examples of companies taking the government to court (or "lobbying" LOL) when they are pushed too far, both when "asked" or required to by law.

Yeah but think of what the govt can do now. They can mobilize minions to socially cancel you. They can launch a billion investigations and tie you up in court. They can come raid your house and terrorize your family like they did to William Binney. And when push comes to shove, they could use NSA obtained info to blackmail you.

[Seatard]

and my underlying point is that the government should not be asking at all.

do you not see how Orwellian that is?

I don't think people are being consistent with the absolute that "the government should not be asking at all".

Standard Issue Retard - "I heard I'll be safe if I drink bleach"

Government - "Don't drink bleach, it's bad for you"

Absurd example for emphasis, but not that far off from what we're dealing with here.


So, as a baseline I think it's clear the government can ask, we're bickering over if they're asking the right things.

[TaiMaiSchutze]

Not all, but he was absolutely a train wreck of a president and probably launched a lot of this stuff off the ground. But to your point, the first time I voted was to vote against him so I voted for Kerry in 2004. Didn’t vote for McCain because he is just as bad as Bush or Obama. Didn’t vote for Romney due to the same reason. After 2004 didn’t vote again until I voted for Trump twice, and I still stand by my view that he was much better than Hillary would’ve been, and if he had stayed in office we would be much better off than with this decrepit shell of a man we have now. Sure there were issues with Trump, but overall much better than the alternatives.

Agreed on Trump. As much as I hate the cheeto.

[TaiMaiSchutze]

I don't think people are being consistent with the absolute that "the government should not be asking at all".

Standard Issue Retard - "I heard I'll be safe if I drink bleach"

Government - "Don't drink bleach, it's bad for you"

Absurd example for emphasis, but not that far off from what we're dealing with here.


So, as a baseline I think it's clear the government can ask, we're bickering over if they're asking the right things.

We all agree fundamentally. The govt should not be asking. We must stand up for that. The govt absolutely should make safe recommendations. That's their job. And a simple Q&A addressing common bs lies that they can debunk is fine. No censorship needed.

At the end of the day something like 10% of the population will always be crazy and reject the truth. They are whatever. We have to live with them. It's like that 1 retard that eats raw meat. It's like ok ur crazy and disgusting but whatever.

[jtaylor2010]

I don't think people are being consistent with the absolute that "the government should not be asking at all".

Standard Issue Retard - "I heard I'll be safe if I drink bleach"

Government - "Don't drink bleach, it's bad for you"

Absurd example for emphasis, but not that far off from what we're dealing with here.


So, as a baseline I think it's clear the government can ask, we're bickering over if they're asking the right things.

Warning labels are already required for bleach(even if you put it in a squirt bottle in a public place it must have certain labels/warnings on it). That’s the extent of the governments role. If someone drinks bleach then it’s on the individual. And also, do you think it’s irresponsible for so many news agencies to say the president told people to inject bleach when that’s clearly not what he was talking about? Or how about saying “the president called nazis fine people” when he clearly said the exact opposite? Should someone step in, or just let the retards continue to believe the president said nazis are fine people?

[ispy]

sounds like they want to copy russia and china, and control what the people see, hear, and read

[Cleveland33]

I don't think people are being consistent with the absolute that "the government should not be asking at all".

Standard Issue Retard - "I heard I'll be safe if I drink bleach"

Government - "Don't drink bleach, it's bad for you"

Absurd example for emphasis, but not that far off from what we're dealing with here.


So, as a baseline I think it's clear the government can ask, we're bickering over if they're asking the right things.

I am questionable on having safety labels required on products - the government should not be protecting us from ourselves


here is how it should go

CT: the earth is flat
Gov: no direct response but NASA continues to post pictures from space

[J.L.C.]

you have read 1984, right?

Plus, Orwell was a Socialist.

[Cleveland33]

Plus, Orwell was a Socialist.

and?

[J.L.C.]

and?

Socialism is pretty far left, no?