Abusing media jeopardizes our precious and fragile democracies

Since banning people from the internet is okay I guess we will now have to look at which radio and TV shows need to be banned as well. In my lifetime I would have to say the most effective purveyor of right wing hate and division is Rush.

Who gets to decide where the line is when citizens chose to talk about overthrowing the system they live under. Is it really best left up to billionaires?

In 1988, Rush launched his phenomenally successful radio broadcast, The Rush Limbaugh Show, into national syndication with 56 radio stations. Now, 32 years later, the show is heard on more than 600 stations by up to 27 million people each week and is the highest-rated national radio talk show in America. On February 5, 2020, at the State of the Union Address, President Donald Trump awarded Rush the Presidential Medal of Freedom, our nation’s highest civilian honor. Rush has also received the Marconi Radio Award five times, and has been inducted into the Hall of Famous Missourians, the Radio Hall of Fame and the National Association of Broadcasters Hall of Fame.

NorthReport wrote:

Violence at Capitol and beyond reignites a debate over America's long-held defense of extremist speech

 

'I think about the people who are impacted'

Harvard's Seltzer and Donovan say it's time to have new conversations on the absolutist interpretations of the First Amendment, taking into consideration the ways ideas live, grow and motivate others in the technological landscape. 

Race and gender scholars point out notions about free speech emanate primarily from scholars and politicians who are overwhelmingly White, Seltzer said: "It's easy for a White male to say, 'Anyone's speech is OK,' and much harder for someone in a minority position who is constantly bombarded with speech telling them they are not equal and who don't have as much access to laws and courts to gain protections."

Those notions also don't account for confirmation bias, a plague of social media wherein people believe disinformation, seek out data supporting it and ignore contradicting information.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/19/us/capitol-riots-speech-hate-extremist-fi...

Dangerous slippery slope.  The First Amendment has never been treated as absolute.  The line is drawn at imminent and direct incitement.  There shouldn't be sociological exceptions to the right to speak to without government punishment.

Not "claims" lies, propaganda. 

Probably not but new laws can be written. I am not sure how it could be done but it should be illegal for someone in power to lie that blatantly about such a critical issue. Trumps followers believed him in large part because he was the President. Commander in Chief. 

When does an accusation become a lie? 

cco wrote:

Laws against "propaganda" will simply mean that the only allowed propaganda is the official kind. How many Canadians still believe Canada burned down the White House in the war of 1812, or "became a nation" at Vimy Ridge? Both of those were mythologies invented long after the fact for other political purposes. I'd think someone who lives in Quebec – a battleground of duelling propagandists for the past six decades – would be more skeptical of an idea like having the legislature determine what the truth is and who's allowed to speak.

And if someone's lies are unfairly damaging to a particular individual, that can be dealt with via existing libel laws.

Concerning what is damaging democracy...

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/21/dear-america-how-to-crea...

Social media facilitating communications between people and groups is not the problem, it's the solution. It has democratized mass communications. It enabled BLM and Idle No More.

voice of the damned wrote:

Pondering: I suppose you could fashion a law specifically targeting the Prime Minister, when acting in his capacity as head-of-government, so that if he says something like "The terrorists have enough dynamite to blow up Montreal!!", he can be hauled into court for lying, on the grounds that he could use those claims to restrict civil-liberties. But really, that would likely just lead to endless rounds of legal gotcha-ism, as opposition parties try to prove there was no evidence for what the PM said, and that it was likely to lead to a suspension of civil liberties, and the government responds with "But in fact, the mounties overheard someone in a bar saying he knew a terrorist who told him they had all that dynamite, and the PM sincerely believed that to be true." And the courts have to sort it all out. Personally, I'd rather just have it so that any attempt at suspending civil liberties is subjected to a rigorous Charter challenge before it can proceed, rather than trying to pick which instances of dubious claims by political leaders are likely to be used to justify repression somewhere down the road.

I could live with that.  Sort of like getting an emergency arrest warrant. Judges can act quickly if time is of the essence. 

There is another culprit that is probably more central to the problem than either lying politicians or social media. 

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/costofliving/let-s-get-digital-from-bitcoin-to-...

Poor reading, writing and numeracy skills in adults make up a literacy gap in Canada with consequences for both democracy and the economy. Experts say the gap is due in part to an abundance of jobs in the past that do not require the daily use of reading comprehension and information synthesis skills...

n short, literacy is not like riding a bike. While Canadians tend to leave the high school level with these skills, it takes practice to retain them and Canada's economy does not provide the opportunity to do that for many workers.

Despite relatively high education rates, an analysis of international assessments by Statistics Canada in 2013 showed that more than one in six adult Canadians fell short of passing the most basic set of literacy tests.

Canada's results, which have not substantially changed since the first PIACC, show that many in this country are unable to complete ordinary tasks, such as filling out a job application, reading a news article or sending an email. 

About half the adult population fell short of passing a high school level of assessment, by testing the ability to digest lengthier and more complex texts while processing the information accurately.

Lack of education makes even smart people suseptible to neoliberal ideals. 

The billionaires who control the Western social media programs are not neutral they are imperialist capitalists who want the US/NATO companies to control the planet and all its resources. Apparently posting on Twitter about the man set on fire by the Hong Kong rioters is something to be banned for. In the meantime US politicians are allowed to use their twitter accounts to attack people in the governments of countries all over the globe, including calling for other people to commit treason and insurrection against their sovereign governments.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzg4c6d0MP0

From my perspective it seems that the Democrats accuse the Republicans and the media outlets that support them of spreading fake news and the Republicans, especially Trumpites, claim the Democrats and the media outlets that support them are spreading fake news. I can't help but agree with both of them. All MSM US outlets from both sides of the duopoly spew a mix of news and fake pieces feed to them by the politicos pulling their strings

NorthReport wrote:

We can't continue to fuck with democracy like this. It is just not working and democracy is too precious and needs better protection.

Let's nail this down a bit from the vague authoritarian platitudes about the government needing to do "something" to ensure people only hear Truth. Who should we censor to "protect democracy" from people hearing the wrong ideas? What mechanism do you propose to decide which thoughts are true and which ones are dangerous lies? Will religion be exempt from all these laws as usual, or will the government decide which religion is the right one?

Please respond in an actual post containing text you wrote yourself, not a single line followed by a URL.

Lol: what goes around comes around...

Note to readers: our disappearing headlines

https://nationalpost.com/editors/note-to-readers-our-disappearing-headlines

"Readers will notice something different today about the front pages of many Postmedia newspapers across Canada: They are blank. It represents a very real phenomenon - local headlines of local newspapers are disappearing across Canada. A large part of the reason is the dominance of global tech giants such as Google and Facebook which refuse to pay a fair price for content created by Canadian news outlets. They also draw off more than 80 percent of all digital advertising revenue in Canada.

Our blank front page is part of a nationwide campaign by News Media Canada to raise awareness of the danger this phenomenon poses not only to local media but to democracy itself. Without reliable, trusted journalism that informs you and keeps government accountable, our democracy and the ability of citizens to respond to local issues will suffer..."

In dog-eat-dog corporate newswars big tech eats 'legacy media'. A plague on both their houses. More and more will abandon them and choose genuinely independent media as the mighty misleaders fall.