Earlier quoted context omitted.
Such as?
Algorithmic governance
So, governance by whoever writes the algorithm? No way.
The Onion buys Infowars
101–110 of 1001 posts
Re: The Onion buys Infowars
#102This sounds like an Onion headline. And to add extra spice, they're actually doing it for a good cause, educating about gun safety in cooperation with nonprofits and the families of children killed in the Sandy Hook massacre. Obligatory fuck Alex Jones with a bat with rusty barbed wire. He profited off the misery of murdered kids, this is beyond low.
[flagged]
Re: The Onion buys Infowars
#103[flagged]
> We must not forget that for a functioning democracy, *impartial and functioning courts* are absolutely essential
Very important for people to remember universally.
Re: The Onion buys Infowars
#104[flagged]
The court system worked very well in this case. A set of parents brought a civil lawsuit against a well-known man who was spreading what they thought were lies and inflicting emotional distress. Jones had plenty of time to respond, and he decided not to. Therefore, the case was decided in default, as is the way all civil cases would have been.
Then, a jury of his peers was brought in to decide on the size of the penalty. After hearing evidence, and giving Jones a chance to respond and question (which his lawyers absolutely failed to do effectively), the jury decided on a penalty.
This is a very simple case of a civil court system working as intended. Just because Jones lies to his audience and his audience is beholden to Jones's view of the world, does not mean the court system is malfunctioning.
Listen to Knowledge Fight, it's better than InfoWars.
Re: The Onion buys Infowars
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Seems like the article is really gleeful. Good! It should be. Alex Jones is a ghoul making money from dead school shooting victims. Anything that embarrasses him is entitled to as much glee as it wants.
Yes and he profits from fooling mentally ill people. Selling homeopatic pills and whatever. But I think the right to be wrong is way more important than getting at Alexander Jones. The precedent is bad.
> The precedent is bad.
I think the opposite precent would be worse. Regulating your tone around anyone with even a mediocum of power for fear of repercussion is part of the reason we're in the situation we face today.
Re: The Onion buys Infowars
#106The announcement by America's Finest News Source: https://theonion.com/heres-why-i-decided-to-buy-infowars/ Alex Jones response: https://x.com/RealAlexJones/status/1857058831135645739
Seems like the article is really gleeful. Somewhat ironic since The Onion could be brought down in the same way by defamation lawsuits.
The Onion was not telling the parents of dead children they were crisis actors and were lying
Don't want to be sued by defamation don't make BS about people in a fragile position. It's that simple
Re: The Onion buys Infowars
#107Re: The Onion buys Infowars
#108Re: The Onion buys Infowars
#109Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Seems like the article is really gleeful. Good! It should be. Alex Jones is a ghoul making money from dead school shooting victims. Anything that embarrasses him is entitled to as much glee as it wants.
Yes and he profits from fooling mentally ill people. Selling homeopatic pills and whatever. But I think the right to be wrong is way more important than getting at Alexander Jones. The precedent is bad.
What precedent do you think this sets exactly?
Re: The Onion buys Infowars
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was a civil case, so no government/prosecutor, and the jury awarded much more than plaintiffs asked for. EDIT: Also you can disagree with the amount, but the award is literally the jury saying that the plaintiffs “prevailed with better arguments”
That doesnt mean it was a reasonable amount.
5'500'000'000 people on the internet, which means an average of 27 cents per user. To say that there is "no possible way" of reaching that level of emotional damages is a stretch.