So, if corporations are people re free speech, again it seems to give them a right to say "no" to free speech absolutism through censorship and create an odd paradox for American free speech advocates. — The Baden
The freedom to say anything, like the freedom to pass gas or salivate, is a condition of life, something that we do by virtue of being a human. — NOS4A2
But the magic doesn't work because no matter how many times you repeat the word, the U.S. (for example) is still not N. Korea, Nazi Germany, or Stalinist Russia. — The Baden
Aversions to criticism are only held by people who know their ideas are flawed. — Tzeentch
I say criticism, and you immediately think of racism? — Tzeentch
History is replete with examples of bad people convincing people to do bad things.
To the extent we can reduce the impact of those who wish to spread their hate to avoid future acts of hate, I see as a good thing. — Hanover
If it is the case that 'people' are prone to being convinced to do bad things by speech acts, even when those speech acts are well countered by contrary voices, then I'm struggling to see how these same people can be convinced to use censorship in a socially responsible way.
...Oh, hang on... I get it. The people doing the censorship are just better people because they're probably middle class and have a university degree... Yep, all makes sense now. As you were... — Isaac
As if the reason I don't want racist speech on Twitter is because I'm secretly fearful that the racists are correct. — Hanover
The question is who you trust with the responsibility of correctly informing the citizens. — Hanover
It has nothing to do with 'information' or unenlightened's tiresome invocation of truth. It's to do with restraining one's speech to get along with others. And, yes, some people do seem to need a little nudge in that direction sometimes.
What's new is the attempt to control the dissemination of actual information by hooking it on these already existing social rules and then pretending (as you do here) that they're one and the same thing and things have always been that way. — Isaac
When you say "actual information", it starts to sound like you mean things that are true — unenlightened
views about what is the case (information), as opposed to views about what ought to be the case (instructions, ideology), or sentiments about what is the case (emoting). — Isaac
Is that not what we are doing here? Exchanging ideas about what is the case and what ought to be the case and how we feel about it? — unenlightened
I'm surprised that folks are so undiscriminating about speaking truth and speaking falsely. — unenlightened
I am speaking my best understanding of the problems we have in society, and how we might improve society. — unenlightened
you are totally full of shit in everything you say — unenlightened
It only even works on this forum because you guys shut off the inflow of shit-posters and trolls - some of which still get through. — ToothyMaw
s that not what we are doing here? Exchanging ideas about what is the case and what ought to be the case and how we feel about it? — unenlightened
Yes, that is what we're doing here because this site is generally well moderated (censorship is limited to matters of civility). — Isaac
If it doesn't matter to you whether your views are true or not, then... but I don't believe that is the case at all. — unenlightened
this site is generally well moderated (censorship is limited to matters of civility). — Isaac
The instances of someone being a victim of some activist cancel culture is very, very rare. — ssu
all issues which have been banned in one way or another from discussion or dissemination on these platforms. None of which are anything to do with politeness or civility, racism, sexism or any other 'ism. They are to do with powerful people constraining the public discourse to promote their interests. — Isaac
What's happening on those platforms is that ideas about what is the case are being censored for no other reason that that they do not agree with what a particular group of people think is the case. — Isaac
The press companies are private companies. They have the right to act for their own personal gain and self-promotion.The position I'm taking, and your thoughts and objections to this is what I am seeking, is that free speech absolutism (a title Elon Musk has given himself) is not an ideal, but places the considerable power of the press in undeserving hands,
whose objective isn't to seek higher truths and dispense with ignorance, but is for their own personal gain and self-promotion. — Hanover
So what is the solution I'm suggesting? We only need to look at the journalistic ethics previously demanded when mass media existed on a smaller scale. An example of them are here: https://www.medialook.al/en/the-5-principles-of-ethical-journalism/
"1. Truth and Accuracy
Journalists cannot always guarantee ‘truth’, but getting the facts right is the cardinal principle of journalism. We should always strive for accuracy, give all the relevant facts we have and ensure that they have been checked. When we cannot corroborate information we should say so.
2. Independence
Journalists must be independent voices; we should not act, formally or informally, on behalf of special interests whether political, corporate or cultural. We should declare to our editors – or the audience – any of our political affiliations, financial arrangements or other personal information that might constitute a conflict of interest.
3. Fairness and Impartiality
Most stories have at least two sides. While there is no obligation to present every side in every piece, stories should be balanced and add context. Objectivity is not always possible, and may not always be desirable (in the face for example of brutality or inhumanity), but impartial reporting builds trust and confidence.
4. Humanity
Journalists should do no harm. What we publish or broadcast may be hurtful, but we should be aware of the impact of our words and images on the lives of others.
5. Accountability
A sure sign of professionalism and responsible journalism is the ability to hold ourselves accountable. When we commit errors we must correct them and our expressions of regret must be sincere not cynical. We listen to the concerns of our audience. We may not change what readers write or say but we will always provide remedies when we are unfair."
Of course there are things gained: power, money, leverage.Nothing is gained by knowingly promoting false, harmful, unapologetic, unexamined claims.
Self-censorship makes the phenomenon seem rarer than it is.It's not you or I, our friends, our work colleagues, relatives, people who we know that are banned. That's what I meant with very, very rare. — ssu
It's not you or I, our friends, our work colleagues, relatives, people who we know that are banned. That's what I meant with very, very rare. — ssu
while some have managed to still acknowledge the existence of fascist groups in Ukraine that exert outsize influence relative to their size, others have simply downplayed or denied facts about them altogether. This comes amid a disturbing politicization of the concept of “disinformation,” which some dominant media, academic studies, and state institutions have used to conflate empirical falsehoods with dissenting opinions and inconvenient facts.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.