Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Not at all a strawman. What is the difference between Donald Trump and the Republicans deciding what is and is not disinformation and Kamala Harris and the Democrats deciding what is and is not disinformation?Nope and never said anything of the sort.
It seems you're crafting a strawman.
Everyone is allowed their opinion on what is and isn't disinformation.Not at all a strawman. What is the difference between Donald Trump and the Republicans deciding what is and is not disinformation and Kamala Harris and the Democrats deciding what is and is not disinformation?
That's the situation we have if we do away with free speech.
Dem government is selling we don’t have the ability to distinguish true from false therefore that effort is to be prohibited because they will do it for us. For our own good of course.Everyone is allowed their opinion on what is and isn't disinformation.
The government never told social media what they can and can't have on their
And when they no longer hold them, resort to weeping and wailing about how unfair it all is.Exactly.
This bears no semblance to reality.Dem government is selling we don’t have the ability to distinguish true from false therefore that effort is to be prohibited because they will do it for us. For our own good of course.
It’s insidiously sinister
Absolutely what the “misinformation” edicts are all aboutThis bears no semblance to reality.
You guys really have lost the ability to differentiate true and false. True is what you want to believe. False is anything you don’t want to believe.
Zuckerberg and others have admitted under oath that they were pressured by the Democrats to suppress certain information leading up to the 2020 election and since. The Democrat controlled MSM has been routinely doing that for years now, not by law but by choice. The small minority of media/social media still offering different information is a constant thorn in their side.Everyone is allowed their opinion on what is and isn't disinformation.
The government never told social media what they can and can't have on their websites.
Progs are the congenital liars. Joe is the colorful proof of it. In his installation and his actions once installed.Conservatives love talking about “questioning” but then they see a third hand rumor on Facebook about Haitians stealing cats to eat and they treat it as fact.
How do you explain that?
People living in their own little delusional worlds where they only get information from social media that is filled with false information is dangerous to the country.
I'm not saying what the answer should be, but the problem with misinformation is clearly there.
We used to think that with enough speech, the truth will win out. That's just not the case in this day and age.
Just pointing out the problem. Do you think the country is stable and thriving if a large chunk of the population falsely believes that the justice system is corrupt because they prosecute criminals in your political tribe?Absolutely what the “misinformation” edicts are all about
Sometimes they do. Sometimes they don’t.This requires you to believe that only your side tells the truth, that is patently stupid.
I have no idea whatsoever of what you are saying. Care to clarify?And when they no longer hold them, resort to weeping and wailing about how unfair it all is.
Pressure is not the same as force. Moreover, Facebook sought out the government to help with policing disinformation on Facebook. At the time, they knew that misinformation was killing people and they felt responsible.Zuckerberg and others have admitted under oath that they were pressured by the Democrats to suppress certain information leading up to the 2020 election and since. The Democrat controlled MSM has been routinely doing that for years now, not by law but by choice. The small minority of media/social media still offering different information is a constant thorn in their side.
What John Kerry is suggesting is the they be able by law to suppress 'disinformation' meaning they should be able to control whatever message they want the people to receive. That would shut down any opposing information from all all sources.
Are you in support of that in the interest of 'protecting the people from disinformation?'
If so who should have the power to decide what is and what is not disinformation?
Or perhaps the First Amendment should be protected and trust the people themselves to sort out what is and is not true?
Or the problem with a weaponized government unethically and in many cases illegally prosecuting political opponents. Should nobody be able to object to that?Just pointing out the problem. Do you think the country is stable and thriving if a large chunk of the population falsely believes that the justice system is corrupt because they prosecute criminals in your political tribe?
No, 2020.But you want me to believe that reporting on something in 2017 affected the election held in 2016?
They shouldn’t lie about it. It is not unethical or illegal to convict people who have committed crimes.Or the problem with a weaponized government unethically and in many cases illegally prosecuting political opponents. Should nobody be able to object to that?
Was not an issue in 2020 as it had been thoroughly debunked.No, 2020.
Zuckerberg admitted they complied with the government pressure to suppress information that turned out to be absolutely correct but was inconvenient/embarrassing to the Democrats.Pressure is not the same as force. Moreover, Facebook sought out the government to help with policing disinformation on Facebook. At the time, they knew that misinformation was killing people and they felt responsible.
Sometimes they do. Sometimes they don’t.
I know that many conservatives and especially MAGA have become almost totally unmoored from reality.
