Should the media be governed by laws or fined

[Captain Caveman]

With all the disinformation and misinformation in the news, should the media be subjected to specific laws, no laws but fined $1bn per wrong story, leave then to carry on the lies, or something else.

I suggest having a media body to investigate and issue automatic fines. I think $1bn would be a good deterrent.

 

[Concerned American]

With all the disinformation and misinformation in the news, should the media be subjected to specific laws, no laws but fined $1bn per wrong story, leave then to carry on the lies, or something else.

I suggest having a media body to investigate and issue automatic fines. I think $1bn would be a good deterrent.

Truth is the only standard that should be legislated.

 

[Votto]

Truth is the only standard that should be legislated.

Truth according to who?

 

[MisterBeale]

With all the disinformation and misinformation in the news, should the media be subjected to specific laws, no laws but fined $1bn per wrong story, leave then to carry on the lies, or something else.

I suggest having a media body to investigate and issue automatic fines. I think $1bn would be a good deterrent.

 

[Concerned American]

Truth according to who?

Truth is supported by FACTS. That has been the standard for objective journalism in the past. It has been abused in the past, but never to the extent that it has in recent years. Outlets used to post citations to justify the truth of what they printed. That isn't the case since Deepthroat. I think that case was necessary to bring down other corruption and law breaking, but in recent years it has been terribly abused. Attributing a source like "the pentagon said" or "officials speaking on conditions of anonymity" should not be a defense of truth.

 

[MisterBeale]

Truth is supported by FACTS. That has been the standard for objective journalism in the past. It has been abused in the past, but never to the extent that it has in recent years. Outlets used to post citations to justify the truth of what they printed. That isn't the case since Deepthroat. I think that case was necessary to bring down other corruption and law breaking, but in recent years it has been terribly abused. Attributing a sources like "the pentagon said" or "officials speaking on conditions of anonymity" should not be a defense of truth.

It matters little.

Unless a person can prove libel or the intention to start a riot, the press can print all the lies they want, so says the Constitution.

 

[Concerned American]

Unless a person can prove libel

The defense for slander, libel, and defamation is TRUTH.

 

[TNHarley]

With all the disinformation and misinformation in the news, should the media be subjected to specific laws, no laws but fined $1bn per wrong story, leave then to carry on the lies, or something else.

I suggest having a media body to investigate and issue automatic fines. I think $1bn would be a good deterrent.

You can tell you are from the UK...

 

[Concerned American]

Unless a person can prove libel

Look up the defense for libel. It is one of the first tenants that is taught in any journalism curriculum. The answer is TRUTH.

 

[Mack The Finger]

They already are...can't you tell !