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

[mattskramer]

How about for broken promises too - like "No new taxes", etc.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

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.

When was this magical time when everything was perfect, and you could trust everything you read in the news?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

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.

Gee.....whatever happened to.....

ALLOWING THE MARKETPLACE TO REGULATE ITSELF?



*

(You're finally having second-thoughts?)​

 

[theDoctorisIn]

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.

Exactly.

 

[Avatar4321]

Here is the big problem with punishing lies: Who determines what are the lies? The government.

There is a reason we don't empower the government to go after people who lie politically. Because those who are corrupt would decide anyone who disagrees with them is lying and "punish" them.

It's why we have a First amendment. So the government can't persecute people for saying something our politicians don't like. The only fools who would want the government to have that power are those who knows their beliefs are lies and can't win when debated and discussed.

My recommendation if you really want to empower politicians to go after people you claim are lying: Stop lying yourself.

 

[mattskramer]

Thankfully we have media watchdog groups like Media Matters, FAIR, and FactCheck.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

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.

The press is a very unique animal...

'Tis true!!!

You can always burn those "documents", and make them disappear.

Let's hear it for.....

State Of The Art!!!

 

[Avatar4321]

Thankfully we have media watchdog groups like Media Matters, FAIR, and FactCheck.

That's a good one. Lol

 

[Mr. Shaman]

If this ever becomes the law of the land, we will never see a politician on tv again!

Not to worry!!!

One-way-or-another, politicians/candidates will ALWAYS find outlets for their.....

POLITICAL SUICIDE.

​

 

[Charles_Main]

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.

So, in the interest of honest political debate on the issues, and in keeping with the need to insure that the public is honestly informed on those issues, should fines be imposed on anyone (and/or their media employer) for making false statements or claims on TV? For the sake of argument, I won't bother to distinguish between intentional lies or mistatement and honest mistakes because it's just too hard to prove one versus the other. However, for anyone who just so happens to make careless claims on TV, which are not supported by the facts, these fines could be a way of forcing them to do their homework in order to get their facts straight. And perhaps, once a person get's a certain number of fines, they can't appear on TV for a specific period of time.

If this plan was implemented, there shouldn't be as many people in this country who are so poorly informed on the issues because they've been manipulated by dishonest people.

No, Simply Because you are opening up whole can of Words we do not want to open. What about Subjects that are Debatable. How do we stop one side from carrying out Political Vendetta's on their Opposition when Talking about Subjects like say. Did the stimulus work, Do Tax cuts create Jobs. ETC. Who is going to determine if the person made a mistake or lied on Purpose?

This sounds like something some totalitarian Regime would want. Not something we want in America.

 

[Charles_Main]

Thankfully we have media watchdog groups like Media Matters, FAIR, and FactCheck.

That's a good one. Lol

I wonder how many times, the so called Media watch Dog group. Media Matters (who Gets Federal Funding) Has exposed the lies of any network other than FOX.

Are you liberals really so Freaking ignorant you think none of the Liberal Press lies?

lol

 

[LordBrownTrout]

No. Never. One man's subjective view is another man's interpolative observation is.............

 

[Steelplate]

Thankfully we have media watchdog groups like Media Matters, FAIR, and FactCheck.

That's a good one. Lol

I wonder how many times, the so called Media watch Dog group. Media Matters (who Gets Federal Funding) Has exposed the lies of any network other than FOX.

Are you liberals really so Freaking ignorant you think none of the Liberal Press lies?

lol

Not at all... but you Shiites seem to be that ignorant that you feel FOXNews and The likes of Beck, Hannity and Limbaugh is the gospel truth.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

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.

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.

You're saying an organization's revenue-flow is directly-proportionate to their credibility?



Or.....are you saying an org's audience-size is directly-proportionate to their credibility?

​

 

[Wonky Pundit]

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.

You're saying an organization's revenue-flow is directly-proportionate to their credibility?



Or.....are you saying an org's audience-size is directly-proportionate to their credibility?

​

It's number 2. When a news organization has a strong reputation for credibility, it attracts more readers/viewers though word of mouth.

Or at least that HAS been the trend in previous decades. The interwebs may have changed things a little...

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Thankfully we have media watchdog groups like Media Matters, FAIR, and FactCheck.

That's a good one. Lol

I wonder how many times, the so called Media watch Dog group. Media Matters (who Gets Federal Funding) Has exposed the lies of any network other than FOX.

Are you liberals really so Freaking ignorant you think none of the Liberal Press lies?

lol

Jesus fucking Christ.

Just because you morons keep repeating it, it doesn't become true.

Media Matters doesn't get any "federal funding".

It is treated no different than all the other conservative watchdog groups.

 

[Avatar4321]

That's a good one. Lol

I wonder how many times, the so called Media watch Dog group. Media Matters (who Gets Federal Funding) Has exposed the lies of any network other than FOX.

Are you liberals really so Freaking ignorant you think none of the Liberal Press lies?

lol

Not at all... but you Shiites seem to be that ignorant that you feel FOXNews and The likes of Beck, Hannity and Limbaugh is the gospel truth.

Gospel truth? hardly. But well knowledgible and easily supported, yes.

You see, we don't want to silence the opposition. We don't want to empower corrupt individuals to throw you in jail because you disagree with us. We want to teach, we want to persuade people. We want people to understand why the Constitution is the miracle it is and why we should follow it instead of ignoring it and always empowering government.

I seriously don't know why you want some bueaucrat in Washington micromanaging your life. I would think youd want some say in how you live your own life. You'd want some responsibility for who you are and what you do.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

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

The most able poster above me helped explain to you, law school reject, why the first amendment comes with ample conditions to be exercised, but does not allow you to yell FIRE in a crowded theater.

I won't go further with this freedom of speech thing, but turn to tort law and civil penalties for actions which are intentionally or negligently harmful. We think of tort law when we sue doctors or drug companies for negligence. But the argument for the use of tort law for intentionally false, misleading, libelous or slanderous speech is much more sympathetic to the general interest of the community in obtaining proper information from press and media sources.

Why would Fox News viewers be so opposed to something aimed at keeping their information source honest?

You're assuming most FAUX Noise fans are tuning-in.....

....for information.

 

[mattskramer]

Thankfully we have media watchdog groups like Media Matters, FAIR, and FactCheck.

That's a good one. Lol

That was not meant to be a joke.

There is also "Accuracy In Media" and the "Media Research Center".

Are those funny?

 

[boedicca]

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.

If someone is the victim of libel or slander, there are already laws of which he can avail himself.