The rise of the "Misinformation Police"

[El Presidente]

Our turnip of a prime minister has come up with the bright idea of setting up a "Misinformation" department to seek out and prosecute purveyors of online misinformation that is spooking the populace of australian sheep. 

Who determines "misinformation".......well the government appointed bureaucrats of course. Now that is one scary proposition indeed. 😲

I would rather take up an invitation for dinner at Hanibal Lecter's place the Saturday night after Lent. 

 

It all reminds me so much of the lyrics "Only for Sheep" by UK band The Bureau. 

 

You show us a new way, you sound so sincere
How sweet it must be to be able to think so clear
But you are just another in a long line of fools
Giving us freedom
With a new set of rules

[Chorus]
It is only for sheep
(Only for sheep, only for sheep)
Yeah
'Cos when you're awake you're asleep
Yeah

 

[gustavehenne]

I would be very nervous about any government making decisions based upon what people can and cannot say. Sadly, most governments have fallen into the 'Wokerati' trap and seek to change the very meaning of the language. Other than the fact that most modern governments (but not all) have proven themselves entirely incompetent and befallen to the next big headline, this would only become a partisan tool....

[99call]

40 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

Who determines "misinformation"

I think anyone living in the real world would take a very brief look at what Putin and Murdoch has done to the western world..... would surmise that these actions were largely an attack democracy, multiculturalism etc  they are right wing in nature, and they have been very very affective

The purest demonstration of this is to say, the UK's Russia investigation was delayed, attacked, obfuscated......when it finally came out,  it concluded that we know 'nothing' about Russian interference, because the powers that be were told "not to look into"................RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE!????      truly vomit inducing. 

The people who should judge what is 'Misinformation' are the people who don't have dirt on their hands, or at least much less dirt on their hands.   It may be hard pill to swallow, but NEWS FLASH! right wing politicians are as corrupt as all hell.  

[Nevrknow]

This ALWAYS works out for the best. Being a history aficionado I can cite examples, there was.....no, not that one. Wait! there was......oh no, nevermind, that one failed, well, then there's.................... et al.

Worst part of this entire convo is there are those that believe this shit.

Fighting thru this at home with the grandkids. School now seems all about memory. What THEY want you to remember. I'm a weirdo, I prefer to teach them how to think for themselves. So far seems to be working. They question their teachers and yes I have had to go defend them. The look of dread when I walk in the room is priceless.

Funny thing is, I'm not even that smart, yet I win the arguments. Go figure.

Thumbs up for me.

[Ken Gargett]

next thing, we'll have book burning. 

[Fireball]

14 hours ago, El Presidente said:

Now that is one scary proposition indeed. 
I would rather take up an invitation for dinner at Hanibal Lecter's place the Saturday night after Lent. 

You always have a way with words.

But really, in a free society all information must be available to everyone. It’s the only real check and balance.

 

 

[99call]

9 minutes ago, gustavehenne said:

'Wokerati'

Jesus Christ, if you want to say 'woke',  then fair play, but to choose to regurgitate verbal diarrhoea of  'Sue Ellen' Bravermen.   She's a walking joke, her career is a skidmark on the history of parliament.    I'm saying this in respect to you.  I find the term 'woke' to be a non-entity, but I understand the principle, and I understand why people need to reference it, but 'Wokerati' or any word that has left that cretin's mouth.  I think you are an infinitely more impressive character than that......sad sad soul. 

 

[Chibearsv]

22 minutes ago, gustavehenne said:

I would be very nervous about any government making decisions based upon what people can and cannot say. Sadly, most governments have fallen into the 'Wokerati' trap and seek to change the very meaning of the language. Other than the fact that most modern governments (but not all) have proven themselves entirely incompetent and befallen to the next big headline, this would only become a partisan tool....

I wouldn’t worry too much about this being something meaningful.  I’d assert that government itself is historically one of the largest purveyors of mis-information. I doubt they will sanction themselves. Count on business as usual…which, granted, has its own issues.

[Fuzz]

You're not a supporter of Miss Information?

[Fuzz]

Just wait till conspiracy theorists discover they're part of a conspiracy to use conspiracy theorists to spread disinformation via conspiracy theories.

[99call]

1 minute ago, chasy said:

The Twitter files show an equal desire from the other side of the aisle to suppress information. Call it disinformation or suppression of real information - the government determining what is ‘deemed’ true and worthy of mainstream dissemination will be carelessly abused from either side. Politicians are vile. Left or right. The suggestion that one side is guilty and the other isn’t is naive at best….

horseshit!

It's like Tucker Carlson whining about elites.......it's just utter farcical bullshit.    The last 20 years has been a A to Z l in the old WW2 lesson  of "accuse you enemy of that which you are guilty".      It's old.......it's boring, and........nobody it buying it. 

The right wing has crashed the western world into a swamp, and we are currently all looking at each other going,   "right!.....who's going to get us out of this mess?"

[gustavehenne]

45 minutes ago, 99call said:

Jesus Christ, if you want to say 'woke',  then fair play, but to choose to regurgitate verbal diarrhoea of  'Sue Ellen' Bravermen.   She's a walking joke, her career is a skidmark on the history of parliament.    I'm saying this in respect to you.  I find the term 'woke' to be a non-entity, but I understand the principle, and I understand why people need to reference it, but 'Wokerati' or any word that has left that cretin's mouth.  I think you are an infinitely more impressive character than that......sad sad soul. 

 

There was a reason it was between apostrophes - I was making fun of it. Chill out.

[Namisgr11]

13 hours ago, Fireball Ron said:

You always have a way with words.

But really, in a free society all information must be available to everyone. It’s the only real check and balance.

A society that cannot make a distinction between legitimate and fallacious claims of information, or refuses to try to, is doomed.

[Bill Hayes]

And they just put the tax up again on beer. 3rd most taxed beers in the world currently. C'mon Aussies, let's aim for #1. Ha ha! I'm gettin' me a moonshine still ASAP.

[BoliDan]

14 hours ago, El Presidente said:

Who determines "misinformation".......well the government appointed bureaucrats of course. 😲

Surely they will hire completely unbiased and unpolitical people in this office. And of course there will be checks and balances with the department of disinformation, bureau of fact checks, and the guys posting memes on Facebook.

[Namisgr11]

Some of you seem to ignore that there's been an assault on generally accepted information of a kind that I've never experienced in 7 decades on this planet.  We're not talking about matters of nuanced complexity, incomplete information, and unsettled issue.  On the one hand.  Election results.  Generally accepted and solidly substantiated scientific information.  On the other hand.  Outright and habitual fabrication.  You know, the easy line to draw between fact and fantasy.

You don't need some bureaucratic nightmare of bias to draw such lines.  We've had editorial control over the dissemination of information in the US since Benjamin Franklin decided to publish and edit a newspaper over 250 years ago.  It's always been deemed necessary, and plainly distinguishes that not everything being passed off as information should have the same freedom of reach.

[El Presidente]

5 minutes ago, Namisgr11 said:

You don't need some bureaucratic nightmare of bias to draw such lines.  

That is the key statement for me. 

Misinformation can be challenged through existing channels.  I don't need an all powerful government filter. 

[Namisgr11]

2 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

That is the key statement for me. 

Misinformation can be challenged through existing channels.  I don't need a government filter. 

Sometimes a legal filter becomes necessary, though.  I can think of 787 million reasons why Dominion had to go this route.

[El Presidente]

2 minutes ago, Namisgr11 said:

Sometimes a legal filter becomes necessary, though.  I can think of 787 million reasons why Dominion had to go this route.

Classic case where existing checks and balances brought them to account. I fail to see the need for a whole new layer of obscurely defined  government  bureaucracy.

[BrightonCorgi]

Suppression of free speech is the foundation of a totalitarian regime.  Miss-information how ever that is defined is allowable free speech.  Whether someone or something thinks that information could harm someone else doesn't matter.

A lot of governments are moving away from free speech.  Like a saying in China, "if nail sticks up too high; it must be banged down". 

Free speech, self determination, property and parental rights; those things are such antiquated 20th century notions.  Enlightened intellectuals know what is best for a just society.  Not you.

 

11 hours ago, El Presidente said:

That is the key statement for me. 

Misinformation can be challenged through existing channels.  I don't need an all powerful government filter. 

In a free market society; the creme always rises to the top. 

[Fuzz]

2 hours ago, BrightonCorgi said:

In a free market society; the creme always rises to the top. 

But sometimes shit can float too!

[NSXCIGAR]

1 hour ago, Fuzz said:

But sometimes shit can float too!

Indeed.

[Namisgr11]

8 hours ago, BrightonCorgi said:

Suppression of free speech is the foundation of a totalitarian regime.  Miss-information how ever that is defined is allowable free speech. 

Sometimes, people confuse freedom of speech with freedom of reach.  Denying the reach of, say, a social media site or the editorial page of a newspaper is something that's been in practice for as long as there has been print media, hundreds of years.  It isn't censorship or denial of freedom of speech to allow anyone to say out loud to anyone who will listen whatever they want but deny them the reach to do so to whomever and in whatever way they please, which are part and parcel of the exchange of legitimate information.

Simply put, there's no place in society for fabrications, lies, and untruths to be spread and, in so doing, confuse and obfuscate generally accepted information and fact from fallacy.  You want to claim the Holocaust never happened or the Earth is flat, have at it, stand on a street corner and shout it, that's your freedom of speech, and you won't be arrested and convicted for it in the US, so long as it's not done in a criminal way that incites and threatens acts of violence, or defames another individual.  But you don't have a right to reach out with that fallacy via any newspaper or internet editorial page or televised news show that you choose, as has been true and practiced in the US for hundreds of years now.

[Vetteman]

Misinformation is becoming a serious problem likely to get worse, but I don't want government deciding what is or isn't. I do want to see social media eliminate anonymity and require proof of age, identity, and country/location of users.

[Namisgr11]

Just now, Vetteman said:

Misinformation is becoming a serious problem likely to get worse, but I don't want government deciding what is or isn't. I do want to see social media eliminate anonymity and require proof of age, identity, and country/location of users.

Well put, and agreed.