Should Fines Be Imposed on Anyone Who Makes False Claims/Statements of Fact on TV?

[Steelplate]

Can't happen, what with this little thing we call the First Amendment.

So you think the first amendment extends to the press manipulating the public into believing falsehoods for their own gain?

We aren't talking about people here. We are talking major news outlets that people rely on for accuracy and honesty to make informed decisions upon. They need to be held to a higher standard.

Yes, the first amendment protects liars provided those lies do not constitute libel or scandal.

What is more scandalous than what lies have done to this country lately?

 

[westwall]

If they knowingly do it absolutely.

 

[Mustang]

Can't happen, what with this little thing we call the First Amendment.

Does the 1st Amendment protect lying? I don't think so. Libel is illegal. So is slander. So is lying to the police. If the 1st Amendment protected lying and liars, those laws could not hold up to a Constitutional challenge.

Actually, it does to some degree. Libel is not a crime; it's a tort. Meaning that nobody can go to jail for doing it; they can only be sued. Same for slander.

Political speech, of course, is very strongly protected by the First Amendment, which is why it has been filled with very deliberate lies from the earliest days.

Libel most certainly is a crime.

Criminal Libel - The History Of Criminal Libel, Development Of The Law In The United States, The Constitutional Protection Of Freedom Of Expression

Aside from that, if people want to offer their opinions, then they should state it as such. That's considerably different than claiming something is factually true when it is not true at all.

 

[Wonky Pundit]

Ok... granted... but you can clearly see on this message board how fanatical rhetoric passed off as fact by established news outlets are affecting this country.

in response to wonky

SP, I'm certainly not implying that it's an ideal situation. I just happen to believe that government pressure on "gutter press" news outlets would be a lot worse.

At the end of the day, no government can shield people from ideas, not even the police states. It has to be up to the individual to listen to what makes sense and turn off what doesn't.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Can't happen, what with this little thing we call the First Amendment.

Does the 1st Amendment protect lying? I don't think so. Libel is illegal. So is slander. So is lying to the police. If the 1st Amendment protected lying and liars, those laws could not hold up to a Constitutional challenge.

Disclaimer: I didn't read the entire thread before responding. If this was already mentioned, please ignore.

Libel is not illegal and neither is slander. Both are actionable torts in the civil system. Lying would be protected speech. People lie (or sometimes we call it, "telling tall tales") for entertainment all the time. I'll need a lot better reason than this to go down the slippery slope of limiting free speech because I'm annoyed.

 

[Steelplate]

Can't happen, what with this little thing we call the First Amendment.

Does the 1st Amendment protect lying? I don't think so. Libel is illegal. So is slander. So is lying to the police. If the 1st Amendment protected lying and liars, those laws could not hold up to a Constitutional challenge.

Disclaimer: I didn't read the entire thread before responding. If this was already mentioned, please ignore.

Libel is not illegal and neither is slander. Both are actionable torts in the civil system. Lying would be protected speech. People lie (or sometimes we call it, "telling tall tales") for entertainment all the time. I'll need a lot better reason than this to go down the slippery slope of limiting free speech because I'm annoyed.

It's not about being annoyed. It's about changing the attitudes of our country through falsehoods and misinformation. That is exactly what is happening.... you know it, I know it.

I don't care if it's left or right... As long as it's factual.

 

[Mustang]

Can't happen, what with this little thing we call the First Amendment.

Does the 1st Amendment protect lying? I don't think so. Libel is illegal. So is slander. So is lying to the police. If the 1st Amendment protected lying and liars, those laws could not hold up to a Constitutional challenge.

Disclaimer: I didn't read the entire thread before responding. If this was already mentioned, please ignore.

Libel is not illegal and neither is slander. Both are actionable torts in the civil system. Lying would be protected speech. People lie (or sometimes we call it, "telling tall tales") for entertainment all the time. I'll need a lot better reason than this to go down the slippery slope of limiting free speech because I'm annoyed.

Of course libel and slander are both illegal. Where did you get the idea they weren't?

People lie all the time, but not all lies are created equal. Some lies are perfectly harmless (as in white lies). Some lies are meant to deceive someone (like a husband lying to his wife about eating a fast food hamburger when he's supposed to be on a diet), but that's not the same about lying to someone to cheat them out of money.

So, while all lying is not illegal, there are plenty of cases where lying in the furtherance of other activities, is illegal. I think a good case could be made that lying about matters of public policy on TV shows intent to defraud the public from the truth in order to make informed decisions. It actually undermines our republic.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Does the 1st Amendment protect lying? I don't think so. Libel is illegal. So is slander. So is lying to the police. If the 1st Amendment protected lying and liars, those laws could not hold up to a Constitutional challenge.

Actually, it does to some degree. Libel is not a crime; it's a tort. Meaning that nobody can go to jail for doing it; they can only be sued. Same for slander.

Political speech, of course, is very strongly protected by the First Amendment, which is why it has been filled with very deliberate lies from the earliest days.

Libel most certainly is a crime.

Criminal Libel - The History Of Criminal Libel, Development Of The Law In The United States, The Constitutional Protection Of Freedom Of Expression

Aside from that, if people want to offer their opinions, then they should state it as such. That's considerably different than claiming something is factually true when it is not true at all.

I'd recommend you read some of the cases cited in your link. You'd find that while there is technically the possibility of having a state criminal action for libel the Supremes have made it a different standard than other crime and increased the mens rea requirements if the states are going to have such a law.

But, despite that fact, you are technically correct on the libel point. So, you can go after all those bad writers out there. (Depending on the state).

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Why would anyone let the government have the final say as to what "truth" is?

 

[FuelRod]

You'd virtually put all of today's media out of business with such fines.

 

[spectrumc01]

Can't happen, what with this little thing we call the First Amendment.

Does the 1st Amendment protect lying? I don't think so. Libel is illegal. So is slander. So is lying to the police. If the 1st Amendment protected lying and liars, those laws could not hold up to a Constitutional challenge.

You can't slander and you can't lie under oath.. other than that.. you can say pretty much what you want.... about Conservatives that is.

take a tenant to court and watch them lie right to the judge, prove they lied to the judge and then watch as the judge does nothing. This is how it works, lying is only a crime if someone in power was lied to.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Can't happen, what with this little thing we call the First Amendment.

Does the 1st Amendment protect lying? I don't think so. Libel is illegal. So is slander. So is lying to the police. If the 1st Amendment protected lying and liars, those laws could not hold up to a Constitutional challenge.

The problem is that it's a very slippery slope because as strange as it may sound, the truth is sometimes subjective to one's opinion. You can't always prove someone is lying and people can have differing opinions on the same subject claiming two different truths, but that doesn't mean they're lying if they actually believe what they're saying.

I don't think this is a road we want to go down.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

So you think the first amendment extends to the press manipulating the public into believing falsehoods for their own gain?

We aren't talking about people here. We are talking major news outlets that people rely on for accuracy and honesty to make informed decisions upon. They need to be held to a higher standard.

Historically, news organizations have policed themselves in this area.

They need revenue to survive, which is tied directly to the sizes of their audiences, which in turn has a lot to do with the organization's credibility.

So what you're saying is that truth doesn't matter. It's all about revenue and audience size.

and yes... HISTORICALLY, news organizations have policed themselves... but you know as well as I do that they are not doing so now. I want truth, not opinion in my news.

and No... I don't watch Maddow or Olbermann any more than I watch Beck or Hannity.

Then get your news from a trustworthy source. The Economist, BBC, Christian Science Monitor, and NPR are usually as un-biased reporting as you can find.

Rarely, outside of mathematics do you ever find absolute truths. There's always gray area.

I don't think the government should be able to decide what the "truth" is.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Does the 1st Amendment protect lying? I don't think so. Libel is illegal. So is slander. So is lying to the police. If the 1st Amendment protected lying and liars, those laws could not hold up to a Constitutional challenge.

Disclaimer: I didn't read the entire thread before responding. If this was already mentioned, please ignore.

Libel is not illegal and neither is slander. Both are actionable torts in the civil system. Lying would be protected speech. People lie (or sometimes we call it, "telling tall tales") for entertainment all the time. I'll need a lot better reason than this to go down the slippery slope of limiting free speech because I'm annoyed.

Of course libel and slander are both illegal. Where did you get the idea they weren't?

People lie all the time, but not all lies are created equal. Some lies are perfectly harmless (as in white lies). Some lies are meant to deceive someone (like a husband lying to his wife about eating a fast food hamburger when he's supposed to be on a diet), but that's not the same about lying to someone to cheat them out of money.

So, while all lying is not illegal, there are plenty of cases where lying in the furtherance of other activities, is illegal. I think a good case could be made that lying about matters of public policy on TV shows intent to defraud the public from the truth in order to make informed decisions. It actually undermines our republic.

See above response for libel. I didn't see where you linked anything for slander. I would assume the Supremes have the same opinion for cases based on slander.

Fraud is a crime. That's what you described in your second para. Yes, I agree that fraud should be punished as a crime.

I'm not at all comfortable with the idea of having "Truth Commissions" in this country. I think the pendulum has swung way too far toward government power and I'm not willing to give them any more.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Can't happen, what with this little thing we call the First Amendment.

Does the 1st Amendment protect lying? I don't think so. Libel is illegal. So is slander. So is lying to the police. If the 1st Amendment protected lying and liars, those laws could not hold up to a Constitutional challenge.

The problem is that it's a very slippery slope because as strange as it may sound, the truth is sometimes subjective to one's opinion. You can't always prove someone is lying and people can have differing opinions on the same subject claiming two different truths, but that doesn't mean they're lying if they actually believe what they're saying.

I don't think this is a road we want to go down.

The "truth" is almost ALWAYS subjective, except when we're talking about math and the laws of physics.

 

[shintao]

So you think the first amendment extends to the press manipulating the public into believing falsehoods for their own gain?

We aren't talking about people here. We are talking major news outlets that people rely on for accuracy and honesty to make informed decisions upon. They need to be held to a higher standard.

Yes, the first amendment protects liars provided those lies do not constitute libel or scandal.

What is more scandalous than what lies have done to this country lately?

Since the Clinton impeachment, America has been in a downward decline.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Does the 1st Amendment protect lying? I don't think so. Libel is illegal. So is slander. So is lying to the police. If the 1st Amendment protected lying and liars, those laws could not hold up to a Constitutional challenge.

Disclaimer: I didn't read the entire thread before responding. If this was already mentioned, please ignore.

Libel is not illegal and neither is slander. Both are actionable torts in the civil system. Lying would be protected speech. People lie (or sometimes we call it, "telling tall tales") for entertainment all the time. I'll need a lot better reason than this to go down the slippery slope of limiting free speech because I'm annoyed.

It's not about being annoyed. It's about changing the attitudes of our country through falsehoods and misinformation. That is exactly what is happening.... you know it, I know it.

I don't care if it's left or right... As long as it's factual.

Yes it's happening. But you folks are acting as if it's new. It has always been thus. Well before the founding of this country and back to the politics of Great Britain people on each side exaggerated the facts or twisted and embellished them to suit their cause.

I think people have the intellectual capacity to see through the bullshit when they need to and want to. Even if they don't, I'm going on record as not wanting truth commissions.

 

[Steelplate]

Yes, the first amendment protects liars provided those lies do not constitute libel or scandal.

What is more scandalous than what lies have done to this country lately?

Since the Clinton impeachment, America has been in a downward decline.

ain't that the truth.

 

[Mustang]

Can't happen, what with this little thing we call the First Amendment.

Does the 1st Amendment protect lying? I don't think so. Libel is illegal. So is slander. So is lying to the police. If the 1st Amendment protected lying and liars, those laws could not hold up to a Constitutional challenge.

The problem is that it's a very slippery slope because as strange as it may sound, the truth is sometimes subjective to one's opinion. You can't always prove someone is lying and people can have differing opinions on the same subject claiming two different truths, but that doesn't mean they're lying if they actually believe what they're saying.

I don't think this is a road we want to go down.

For years, the American media had a stellar reputation because of the use of fact checkers and, in part, because opinions weren't expressed on the air. News was, in fact, NEWS. It wasn't someone's opinion about the news of the day. That's all changed with competing interests trying to mold public opinion for their own interests. Well, since TV stations have to be licensed, the companies and their on-air talent must meet minimum standards of conduct. It wouldn't be diffictult at all to make sure that someone's opinion is clearly stated as such and deliniated from what's offered as independently true from someone's stated opinion about it.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

One thing I've come to know over the years, is that there is a tremendous amount of BS in the world. It takes many forms. You can call it lying, dissembling, disinformation, prevarication, fabrication, deception, distortion, defamation, slander, deceit,...

Personally, I'm sick of it. Most people won't put up with it in their real lives if and when they discover it. They'll just toss it out of their lives even if it means ending the relationships with the people who are being dishonest with them.

But what about when it comes into your home via TV or the Internet?

While there are truth in advertising laws when it comes to companies making claims about their products, politicians, and partisan TV commentators can seemingly say anything they want, regardless of how outrageously untrue it is, and there are no consequences.

I know that some false statements are honest mistakes. I also know that many false statements and claims are intentional. People are intentionally trying to muddy the waters and confusing honest people in the process.

.....And, when it comes to FAUX Noise, it's a matter of keeping confused-people.....

....MORE confused.

*

FAUX News LIES