Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 421 posts

Re: The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation

#351

Post by mensetmanusman »

burlesona wrote: post #275
Animats wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worth listening to the people from censorship-heavy countries. The US is better off for not having censorship. Free speech is messy. But it beats the alternative. It's useful to read what the extremists have to say, if you read the extremists from both sides. You can still read Dabiq, ISIL's magazine, online. (That may have backfired. Their position was, it's a war to the death between our Islam and everybody el…

I agree with you that it’s worthwhile to read what everyone has to say. One problem is that Facebook and Twitter, not to mention the NYT and the rest of the media, are not that. Social media places you in a filter bubble, and whatever you click on first shapes everything you’ll see forever, such that your entire worldview is shifted. The media does essentially the same thing, tailoring it’s articles to match a partic…

Sound’s like a simple fix is to not put you in a news-based filter bubble. Randomize all of that.

Re: The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation

#352

Post by mensetmanusman »

I think we know now that people that want to be disinformed tend to consume media.

Why do we keep seeing studies that show people who engage more with the main stream media have a far more skewed view of reality. That includes places like the NYT.

Why: because to make money you have to focus on the long tail of events, which always describe outliers. It’s how Trump got elected: he was good money.

Re: The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation

#353

Post by jacquesm »

amadeuspagel wrote: post #201
jacquesm wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But he lived well before the age of the internet and maybe, you know, just maybe when the world changes we should adapt to it rather than to dogmatically hold that what one person thought a couple of hundred years ago should be enshrined and never ever be changed lest the sky falls down.

Maybe, you know, just maybe we can learn something from people writing on timeless issues, even if they wrote before the lastest technological change.

In that case, let's make the bible our literal guide and get it over with.

Of course you can learn something from people writing on timeless issues. But by making them the dogmatic truth you get locked in.

Re: The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation

#354

Post by [deleted] »

jacquesm wrote: post #353
amadeuspagel wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, you know, just maybe we can learn something from people writing on timeless issues, even if they wrote before the lastest technological change.

In that case, let's make the bible our literal guide and get it over with. Of course you can learn something from people writing on timeless issues. But by making them the dogmatic truth you get locked in.

[deleted]

Re: The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation

#355

Post by srean »

betwixthewires wrote: post #130
srean wrote: post #23

A problem is the inherent asymmetry in the ease with which one can create a believable lie and the difficulty of ensuring that its refutation reaches everywhere the lie has reached. You can easily tie up the fact checkers and refuters with what amounts to a denial of service attack. Should one curtail free speech ? My opinion is no, but one needs to realize what we sign up for when we do that.

What we sign up for is the burden and responsibility to educate ourselves and thoroughly, skeptically vet information ourselves. Interestingly, we have this burden anyway regardless, and censoring information only increases that burden and makes it more difficult to verify information.

The 'educate myself' is not that hard, the much harder problem is to get the truth out to those who have already been sold on propaganda. Facts rarely make people change their mind. As they say, one can only lead a horse to the water.

Re: The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation

#356

Post by wdn »

joshuamorton wrote: post #279
unishark wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speech in freedom of speech refers to the communication of ideas and opinions, not all communication. The term "freedom of expression" is commonly used to clarify this. Lying to your partner is not a crime. Taking their money under those circumstances is the crime.

But again, this is just the status quo. Why is lying to someone to take their money a crime, but lying to someone to influence an election not? What makes money worth special protections, but voting not?

It is because politicians lie. Filtering one side but no the other by the media and social media is censoring.

They are interfering with election.

Re: The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation

#357

Post by deepbreath »

Barrin92 wrote: post #210
easterncalculus wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany and France don't have free speech. If there's speech that you receive legal action for then it isn't free.

Weird because I'm German and I wasn't aware that I'm living in North Korea. Did the US patent the definition of free speech or something? I don't even know how people can say this stuff with a straight face. It's like saying "the US does not have healthcare" because of policy differences.

> I don't even know how people can say this stuff with a straight face.

It's not too difficult to do so, when there are examples of courts banning satirical poems of a foreign leader from being uttered: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38934027

Would something like this ever happen in the US? Could you provide an example?

Re: The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation

#358

Post by jacquesm »

abecedarius wrote: post #223
jacquesm wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But he lived well before the age of the internet and maybe, you know, just maybe when the world changes we should adapt to it rather than to dogmatically hold that what one person thought a couple of hundred years ago should be enshrined and never ever be changed lest the sky falls down.

I completely agree that citing authority is not an argument. I only contend here that the GP made an inaccurate summary in dismissing Mill's argument; and that argument is only one chapter, not the whole book as you might think from the way it's cited. You might find it pretty on point: he wrote in Victorian times which were also a local maximum of social pressure to profess the correct thoughts. Also a time with unp…

I find it hilarious that my comment got flagged by - supposedly - the proponents of free speech.

Re: The Problem of Free Speech in an Age of Disinformation

#360

Post by sgerenser »

rayiner wrote: post #304
adamsea wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They will all lie and manipulate when it suits them. Absolutely. At the same time I think it makes sense to single out Fox News at this current moment. For several years now they have they been a straight-up propaganda mouthpiece. They’re noticeably worse. I’d call myself a Progressive, but FWIW as a habit I don’t watch any television news regularly - I read. Point being I think it’s reasonable to say that you can’…

Fox News isn’t designed to be even handed. “Fair and Balanced” is an inside joke. It’s designed to bring balance to a media industry that skews heavily left by offering the countervailing view on issues. (I do agree it’s gone downhill since Ailes left. Megyn Kelly has said as much.) To put it differently: you cannot understand what’s going on in the world just reading the NYT and watching CNN, especially in the Trump…

I’m not convinced that the majority of “the media” skews to the left (although some subsets, like say, the NYT opinion page probably do). CNN however is definitely left leaning, at least in the era of Trump. I don’t remember them always being this left leaning, I feel like they saw the success of Fox News and decided they needed a foil on the left.
Post reply on HN