Should hateful speech be illegal?

[+DieChecker]

2 hours ago, AnchorSteam said:

And there is a darker side to this. Once people get to the point where they not only can't stand the words of their political opposition, but their presence, then they move on to eliminating those people. If this sort of madness could overcome peoples as different as  the Germans, the Chinese, the Cambodians and the Rwandans, then it can happen to anyone on Earth.

Including us. 

This reminds me of this recent rallies here in Portland with the Patriot Prayer people. They are just a couple hundred people for each rally, and could easily be ignored, but each time they show up, thousands of Far Left loons show up to protest them. And then inevitably some hothead in the left side of things throws something, or charges the Patriot Prayer people, and it turns into a melee. If those counter protesters didn't show up, and left the Alt Right people to their (LEGAL) rally, then those Alt Right people would basically go away. But because they (The counter demonstrators) keep starting riots, the Alt Right people are collecting MORE followers, and getting MORE publicity. 

The Far Left in Portland are their own worst enemy. 

They also stormed the ultra Liberal Portland City Council meetings recently. Yelling that the city needs to throw out ICE. And that not doing so makes them HORRIBLE people. The city is already far left, but not far left enough for these vocal, violent nutjobs. Several were arrested the other day for disrupting the City Council and refusing to leave when ask politely. 

EDIT: Look what the counter protesters have done....

https://www.wweek.com/news/2018/08/08/today-was-success-right-wing-marchers-from-across-the-country-have-declared-portland-enemy-territory-to-conquer/

Quote

Right-Wing Marchers From Across the Country Have Declared Portland Enemy Territory to Conquer

The (liberal) counter protesters feel that the far right people apparently don't have a right to gather, and keep deciding to try to stop them. They don't seem to realize they are the ones acting in a Fascist way. They don't seem to realize THEY are the ones instigating hate and violence... which supposedly is what they are protesting against. Stupid hypocrites.

Edited August 10, 2018 by DieChecker

[Myles]

8 hours ago, Kismit said:

 That is why I personally would like to see regulations put on "youtube" news. There is no legal requirement for some youtubers, to be honest in thier reporting, because it all hides under the guise of opinion piece.

 

It wouldn't be right to put "regulations" on Youtube news and not the other news outlets.   

I'm not one who likes people who sue over every thing.    I've never been part of a lawsuit.   However, the only way to limit the spreading of fake news may be to make it easier for people to sue over dishonest news reporting.  

Edited August 10, 2018 by Myles

[Farmer77]

7 minutes ago, Myles said:

However, the only way to limit the spreading of fake news may be to make it easier for people to sue over dishonest news reporting.  

The big question with that is who gets to be the arbitrator of truth?  If I had the energy I could show you probably 50 instances of Trump proclaiming "fake news" when the news actually was true, and just to be balanced Benzagi was claimed to be about a youtube video and if the moronic "fake news" mantra had been created by Cambridge Analytica at that time Obama and company undoubtedly would have used it. ,  so we clearly cant trust the government to make that decision. 

 

[Myles]

6 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

The big question with that is who gets to be the arbitrator of truth?  If I had the energy I could show you probably 50 instances of Trump proclaiming "fake news" when the news actually was true, and just to be balanced Benzagi was claimed to be about a youtube video and if the moronic "fake news" mantra had been created by Cambridge Analytica at that time Obama and company undoubtedly would have used it. ,  so we clearly cant trust the government to make that decision. 

 

Good point, but something needs to be done.   I agree that Trump has proclaimed "fake news" too often.   He was correct in several instances though.  

[Farmer77]

2 minutes ago, Myles said:

Good point, but something needs to be done.   I agree that Trump has proclaimed "fake news" too often.   He was correct in several instances though.  

and I do agree that something needs to be done, I just cant seem to find any good short term options. 

Long term I cant help but believe that the key is education but we as a nation cant even agree on its importance so I dont see any progress being made anytime soon. 

[lost_shaman]

I don't have any real answer myself to give re: Fake news, I just think it's the new reality of the digital age. One problem that could be addressed is the fact that the education system stopped teaching critical thinking to young people. Then you have Millennials  who have grown up with powerful technology and they just trust what they see and read and subsequently are not so great at picking out a false narrative while older people still tend to be better at this and are more critical an thus a bit better at picking out a false narrative. Even that latter fact is changing because the technology to fake things is progressing so rapidly that bad actor can now basically take a picture of a person and audio of their voice and make a fake video of them saying anything the bad actor wants and it's becoming impossible to tell these are fakes. This is even becoming a military concern. In a few years you'll need AI to pick out the fakes, and even that might only be a temporary solution. We are entering this new reality and there is no going back.

[Kismit]

8 hours ago, Myles said:

It wouldn't be right to put "regulations" on Youtube news and not the other news outlets.   

I'm not one who likes people who sue over every thing.    I've never been part of a lawsuit.   However, the only way to limit the spreading of fake news may be to make it easier for people to sue over dishonest news reporting.  

I am talking about placing the same legal standard on youtube news wich already exists on mainstream news. Because your mainstream news is forced to publicly detract misinformation. YouTube news is not. YouTube news skirts this by falling under the guise of opinion piece. 

 

[aztek]

you tube is not responsible for contest, users who upload it are.

[Kismit]

1 minute ago, aztek said:

you tube is not responsible for contest, users who upload it are.

You are not fully understanding my statement. 

And I use the term "youtube" news to cover anyone who uploads"reporting " to a video sharing platform under the guise of opinion piece.  Wich negates thier legal obligation to be accountable when they, "report" facts.

[aztek]

Just now, Kismit said:

You are not fully understanding my statement. 

And I use the term "youtube" news to cover anyone who uploads"reporting " to a video sharing platform under the guise of opinion piece.  Wich negates thier legal obligation to be accountable when they, "report" facts.

yes, that is pretty much it, that is the price you pay for free video sharing services. opinions pieces are just that opinions, not to be taken as hard fact news.

Edited August 10, 2018 by aztek

[Kismit]

10 minutes ago, aztek said:

yes, that is pretty much it, that is the price you pay for free video sharing services. opinions pieces are just that opinions, not to be taken as hard fact news.

Some people do though aztec. And as I said in a previous post, several times in the last week I have read posts by people happy to take the word of "youtube" reporters based on nothing but their word. 

If someone appears to be honest because they never have to retract lies, they are not actually honest. In fact they have less incentive to be honest. And yet we live in a world were people are willing to swallow it hook, line and sinker.

Edit to add: in fact some people take it as more reliable than hard facts news.

[lost_shaman]

1 hour ago, Kismit said:

Because your mainstream news is forced to publicly detract misinformation. YouTube news is not.

Our mainstream news only voluntarily 'retracts' whatever they want, here they are not 'forced' to do that. Freedom of the Press is enshrined in 'our' Constitution. i.e. no-one is forcing them as "News Organizations" to do anything. 

[aztek]

Just now, Kismit said:

Some people do though aztec.

 

i'm sure some do. there will always be gullible people in the world, who believe anything, should your life revolve around them? there are some lies on YT, but there a lot more truth there. so let me figure what i want to believe myself, i do not need someone biased who thinks he knows better to do it for me.

Edited August 10, 2018 by aztek

[Dejarma]

14 minutes ago, Kismit said:

Some people do though aztec. And as I said in a previous post, several times in the last week I have read posts by people happy to take the word of "youtube" reporters based on nothing but their word. 

If someone appears to be honest because they never have to retract lies, they are not actually honest. In fact they have less incentive to be honest. And yet we live in a world were people are willing to swallow it hook, line and sinker.

Edit to add: in fact some people take it as more reliable than hard facts news.

that's how i feel about ufo/ alien reports by those who (to some) are supposed to be trustworthy within the ufo/ alien community, i.e:

the famous 'ufologists' who write books, make documentaries/ films etc etc!

 

[Paranormal Panther]

10 hours ago, lost_shaman said:

I don't have any real answer myself to give re: Fake news, I just think it's the new reality of the digital age. One problem that could be addressed is the fact that the education system stopped teaching critical thinking to young people. Then you have Millennials  who have grown up with powerful technology and they just trust what they see and read and subsequently are not so great at picking out a false narrative while older people still tend to be better at this and are more critical an thus a bit better at picking out a false narrative. Even that latter fact is changing because the technology to fake things is progressing so rapidly that bad actor can now basically take a picture of a person and audio of their voice and make a fake video of them saying anything the bad actor wants and it's becoming impossible to tell these are fakes. This is even becoming a military concern. In a few years you'll need AI to pick out the fakes, and even that might only be a temporary solution. We are entering this new reality and there is no going back.

There was "fake news" written in cuneiform on stone tablets in ancient Mesopotamia. People act like this is something new. The lame term is just a political football used by leftists and rightists to tarnish each other's sources of information. If they see a live stream, that doesn't support their beliefs, they'll refer to observable reality as "fake news".

[aztek]

the fact of life is, people lie, always have, always will.  

[AnchorSteam]

7 hours ago, Kismit said:

Some people do though aztec. And as I said in a previous post, several times in the last week I have read posts by people happy to take the word of "youtube" reporters based on nothing but their word. 

Are they, really? Or are they just pulling our legs?

I post vids so that people can see the whole and un-edited commentary instead of what the news is telling people. Similar to what you were trying to get at with looking for the full context on the Tweets that got that woman at the New York Times in so much trouble this week.

Funny thing about YouTube; it has that list of relevant vids on the right, and when a vid is really sensational, you can almost always find rebuttal vids there.

Both sides are well represented there. 

Quote

Edit to add: in fact some people take it as more reliable than hard facts news.

As we said in the military; there is always that 10%.

Their minds are not mine to police.

 

Up above.... yeah, my last post is too wordy, but I wanted to give attention to all your points.  It is the part at the bottom that matters. 

 

 

First they came for Alex Jones... and what comes next?

Free speech is hate speech

Debate is violence

Opinion is fact

Opposing opinion shouldn't be even humored

Government should have All the power.

 Welcome to the current year ladies and gentlemen

 

Edited August 11, 2018 by AnchorSteam