Ending hate, lies and slander in the media - it has happened before.

[iamwhatiseem]

Prior to 1798 - many newspapers were outrageous liars. Political campaigns would pay them money to print all manner of lies about their opponents. And there were no laws to stop them. Congress had made their right to free speech - without limits.
And that was dumb. and the result was most of the "news" that citizens could get - was filled with garbage.
So in 1798 - The Alien and Sedition Act was passed by Congress - making it illegal for newspapers to print "false, scandalous and malicious writing" against the government. The laws were extremely unpopular and were allowed to expire in 1801
That law was too broad, so over a period of the next 100 years all manner of rules and regulation was put in place to make it LIABLE for news organizations to lie and slander.


This is just a continuation of this - but now includes social media platforms and television.

 

[Edgetho]

dimocrap FILTH are more than willing to point out that, when the 2nd Amendment was written, there was no way The Founders could envision Machine Guns, WMDs, etc.

This is true. So dimocrap SCUM are more than willing to ban the Average American from owning Nukes and F-15s. I'd like to have a Nuclear Submarine, myself. But, alas. It will never be.

When the 1st Amendment was written, if you had tried to tell The Founders that we would have Televisons that could pick up signals out of thin air and turn them into live, moving pictures on a TV Set, they would have burned you at the stake.

If you had told The Founders that we'd have Satellites in Space picking up those signals and sending them to our TV Sets, they would have boiled you in Oil and THEN burned you at the stake.

The Founders said "Freedom of the PRESS". They didn't mention TV Sets or satellites or whatever.

It's all Court-Made Law. And it needs to be re-visited. Probably with a Constitutional Amendment. Which is the only way we can reel-in a radicalized Judiciary and an Activist Media.

The Framers could no more foresee Satellites and TV sets than they could foresee Nuclear weapons.

The Judiciary simply awarded itself the power to make these decisions out of thin air. This "Because I Said So" shit from the Judiciary needs to stop.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

dimocrap FILTH are more than willing to point out that, when the 2nd Amendment was written, there was no way The Founders could envision Machine Guns, WMDs, etc.

This is true. So dimocrap SCUM are more than willing to ban the Average American from owning Nukes and F-15s. I'd like to have a Nuclear Submarine, myself. But, alas. It will never be.

When the 1st Amendment was written, if you had tried to tell The Founders that we would have Televisons that could pick up signals out of thin air and turn them into live, moving pictures on a TV Set, they would have burned you at the stake.

If you had told The Founders that we'd have Satellites in Space picking up those signals and sending them to our TV Sets, they would have boiled you in Oil and THEN burned you at the stake.

The Founders said "Freedom of the PRESS". They didn't mention TV Sets or satellites or whatever.

It's all Court-Made Law. And it needs to be re-visited. Probably with a Constitutional Amendment. Which is the only way we can reel-in a radicalized Judiciary and an Activist Media.

The Framers could no more foresee Satellites and TV sets than they could foresee Nuclear weapons.

The Judiciary simply awarded itself the power to make these decisions out of thin air. This "Because I Said So" shit from the Judiciary needs to stop.

Exactly - I wrote about comparing the 1st to the 2nd amendment to what is happening now.
When the 2nd amendment was made, a citizen could have any weapon they wanted. In fact, it was common for soldiers to keep and take home the very rifles they used while in military service.
The framers had no idea that there would be weapons that could take out whole city blocks, so - later new laws were written to reel in that amendment to prevent people from having these mass weapons. So yeah - you can't own an operational tank.
Same now with social media - the laws need to be revisited to reel in outrageous lies and slander that are promoted by the platforms that host them.
Just like they did in the 1800-1900s with news organizations.

 

[Darkwind]

Prior to 1798 - many newspapers were outrageous liars. Political campaigns would pay them money to print all manner of lies about their opponents. And there were no laws to stop them. Congress had made their right to free speech - without limits.
And that was dumb. and the result was most of the "news" that citizens could get - was filled with garbage.
So in 1798 - The Alien and Sedition Act was passed by Congress - making it illegal for newspapers to print "false, scandalous and malicious writing" against the government. The laws were extremely unpopular and were allowed to expire in 1801
That law was too broad, so over a period of the next 100 years all manner of rules and regulation was put in place to make it LIABLE for news organizations to lie and slander.


This is just a continuation of this - but now includes social media platforms and television.

The law should have language like "Knowingly distribute misinformation".

The mainstream media has been acting as the PR firm for the Democrats for 70 years. In the past decade, it has gotten so bad that even those who have their nose to the grindstone, eeking out a living, have taken notice.

I'm against silencing speech, but there is a 'public good' issue at stake here.

The left and the media -- redundant I know -- have been acting against the public good for a long time now.

 

[berg80]

The law should have language like "Knowingly distribute misinformation".

Faux would be shut down under such a provision.

 

[Darkwind]

Faux would be shut down under such a provision.

Every single one of them would be. Given the nature of social media, maybe its high time they went away. They don't follow any real standards in ethics and impartiallity.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The law should have language like "Knowingly distribute misinformation".

The mainstream media has been acting as the PR firm for the Democrats for 70 years. In the past decade, it has gotten so bad that even those who have their nose to the grindstone, eeking out a living, have taken notice.

I'm against silencing speech, but there is a 'public good' issue at stake here.

The left and the media -- redundant I know -- have been acting against the public good for a long time now.

No one planned on the ENTIRE news media - in full cooperation - to sell their souls to push political ideology to this extent. To be perfectly willing to sit there and knowingly lie to us. Just outright lie.
How do you legislate that without restricting free speech?

 

[Edgetho]

The law should have language like "Knowingly distribute misinformation".

The mainstream media has been acting as the PR firm for the Democrats for 70 years. In the past decade, it has gotten so bad that even those who have their nose to the grindstone, eeking out a living, have taken notice.

I'm against silencing speech, but there is a 'public good' issue at stake here.

The left and the media -- redundant I know -- have been acting against the public good for a long time now.

There is a certain Media that we really need.

Like the journalist that goes and sits in the City Council meeting for hour after boring hour to watch and report on what's going on behind closed doors. And the journalists that report from Battlefields. That takes some balls.

We need those people. I hold them in the highest possible regard.

But the DISGUSTING FILTH has infiltrated and infected and taken over the NATIONAL media. They turned it into entertainment first (bread and circuses) and then into the Propaganda arm of the dimocrap scum party.

We NEED a responsible, mature media. I expect them to be on the 'liberal' side (true liberal, not scum of the Earth dimocrap, communist FILTH) and that doesn't bother me. It is the right and reasonable thing.

But too many see themselves as Crusaders. And they are all filled with Hate from the Indoctrination of communist perfessers and their peers from the ranks of the rich and totally useless.

AWFLs. AffluentWhiteWhiteFemaleLiberals. Entitled, spoiled little scrunts. ALL of them.

But we need a responsible media so we have to be careful not to tear it all down. Just the DISGUSTING FILTH end of it. Which, believe it or not, is in the minority. The scumbags are just the loudest.

 

[Mac1958]

Faux would be shut down under such a provision.

I suspect there would be a noticeable dearth of MAGA outlets, shows and podcasts being bothered in the slightest.

They only "speak the truth", ya know.

 

[Edgetho]

“Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.​

In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”​

― Michael Crichton