IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 24th February 2021, 12:04 PM   #81
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,631
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Nonsense. Your claim that legally being prevented from telling lies means that one then can't tell the truth is disproved by laws against lying.
You need to read what I wrote more carefully, because you clearly don't understand it. Go on, quote exactly what I said.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:07 PM   #82
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 15,361
I'm actually a bit frightened by the illiberal, repressive, and downright authoritarian views being expressed here.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:07 PM   #83
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Is it?

As I already mentioned, the most direct causal connection we have to specific actions and specific deaths from Covid is probably the nursing home orders. But that seems to get a pass for some reason. Which is why I think this is all a pretense.
Yes, it is. Then again, the fact that you don't care or even seem to realize that more people died than just those in nursing homes shows where the pretense lies. Countries that did not have those from your tribe telling them that masks not only aren't helpful but will actually cause harm have far fewer deaths. Countries that didn't have those from your tribe telling them that Covid was all a hoax, or no worse than the common cold have far fewer deaths. 2 weeks after my uncle sent me a mocking message about how the Democrats couldn't keep up the Covid hoax much longer (ideas he got from the news agencies you, Emily's Cat, and Distracted1 believe should be free from the consequences of telling), he was dead of Covid.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:09 PM   #84
Distracted1
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 5,620
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Yes, it is. Then again, the fact that you don't care or even seem to realize that more people died than just those in nursing homes shows where the pretense lies. Countries that did not have those from your tribe telling them that masks not only aren't helpful but will actually cause harm have far fewer deaths. Countries that didn't have those from your tribe telling them that Covid was all a hoax, or no worse than the common cold have far fewer deaths. 2 weeks after my uncle sent me a mocking message about how the Democrats couldn't keep up the Covid hoax much longer (ideas he got from the news agencies you, Emily's Cat, and Distracted1 believe should be free from the consequences of telling), he was dead of Covid.
Try to stretch your memory waaaaaay back to the beginnings of this pandemic, and see if you can't remember who's "tribe" was telling us not to wear masks.

How many deaths are they responsible for?
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:11 PM   #85
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,460
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I'm actually a bit frightened by the illiberal, repressive, and downright authoritarian views being expressed here.
Authoritarians stormed our Capitol to stop a free and fair election from deciding who is in charge of our government and you're pearl clutching over the idea of examining the incentives that leads media companies to amplify the hatred and lies that supported it.

Your dissatisfaction with the response isn't evidence the response was any of the things you accuse it of being, let alone wrong.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:13 PM   #86
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
You need to read what I wrote more carefully, because you clearly don't understand it. Go on, quote exactly what I said.
Sure:
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
As I explicitly stated and you seem to have ignored, if I cannot ever tell a lie, I cannot tell the truth either.
To be followed by 1 of 2 actions (not that you aren't predictable)
1) crickets, Zig stops posting at all in the thread (benfords law was one such discussion)
2)Zig tries bluster to explain away why he didn't say what he actually said
2)
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:14 PM   #87
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,460
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
Try to stretch your memory waaaaaay back to the beginnings of this pandemic, and see if you can't remember who's "tribe" was telling us not to wear masks.

How many deaths are they responsible for?
Here we have the exact intellectual dishonesty that has been used to cover for political malice for years now.

There is a difference between being wrong, being extremely negligent, and lying for political gain knowing it will harm people.

Which tribe kept telling us to not wear masks even after it became clear that would harm people? These things are not equivalent. Obviously. Blatantly. And if you were incentivized monetarily to amplify such lies that is worth examining. This isn't a close call.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:16 PM   #88
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
Try to stretch your memory waaaaaay back to the beginnings of this pandemic, and see if you can't remember who's "tribe" was telling us not to wear masks.

How many deaths are they responsible for?
You mean when we didn't have enough masks for doctors and nurses, and the "tribe" of medical experts was telling people not to panic buy them all like they did with toilet paper? Or did your narrative forget that?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:17 PM   #89
Distracted1
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 5,620
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Here we have the exact intellectual dishonesty that has been used to cover for political malice for years now.

There is a difference between being wrong, being extremely negligent, and lying for political gain knowing it will harm people.

Which tribe kept telling us to not wear masks even after it became clear that would harm people? These things are not equivalent. Obviously. Blatantly. And if you were incentivized monetarily to amplify such lies that is worth examining. This isn't a close call.
Of course.
When the side in power does it- it is "just being wrong" (ETA: Although, at least one other poster here seems to think the lie was deliberate.)
When the side being villified does it it is "lying to harm people".

To be decided by the group in power at the time, of course.

Makes one think that there is a pretty good reason for making laws that say the Gov. has to leave those kinds of judgment calls alone. I would even put it in the Constitution.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.

Last edited by Distracted1; 24th February 2021 at 12:23 PM.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:20 PM   #90
Distracted1
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 5,620
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
You mean when we didn't have enough masks for doctors and nurses, and the "tribe" of medical experts was telling people not to panic buy them all like they did with toilet paper? Or did your narrative forget that?
I see.
So, even at the time they knew that wearing masks was effective for reducing spread- yet claimed that it was not in order to fulfill another agenda. Still, they are not responsible for the spread that could have been prevented by more people wearing masks in the first place- who gets to decide that?

Sounds like a free press to me.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:27 PM   #91
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,631
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Sure:


To be followed by 1 of 2 actions (not that you aren't predictable)
1) crickets, Zig stops posting at all in the thread (benfords law was one such discussion)
2)Zig tries bluster to explain away why he didn't say what he actually said
2)
Do you see that word "ever"?

Do you know what it means?

Do you know why I included it?

Defamation laws don't prevent me from ever telling a lie. They aren't supposed to.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:29 PM   #92
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,460
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
Of course.
When the side in power does it- it is "just being wrong" (ETA: Although, at least one other poster here seems to think the lie was deliberate.)
When the side being villified does it it is "lying to harm people".

To be decided by the group in power at the time, of course.

Makes one think that there is a pretty good reason for making laws that say the Gov. has to leave those kinds of judgment calls alone. I would even put it in the Constitution.
Fully wrong. It wasn't even the group in power at the time who was combating deadly covid information. That they have since gained power should be a clue on that.

The right isn't as clever as you operate on them being. It isn't hard to tell they were lying with extreme callous disregard to if the lies would cause great harm. It helped them politically, so they said it, defended it, and made very silly false equivalences. More than that, they insist everyone pretend it was hard to tell.

Again, this isn't a close call. That deniability isn't plausible.

The real fear is, like all the other issues I listed, reasonable solutions would be found and popular. This would hurt the right who require reality denial to be viable politically right now. Thus the well has to be poisoned. Even looking at the incentives is a violation of the freedom of speech. The real authoritarians aren't the ones trying to illegally and violently overturn elections, but the people who want to tell if companies are incentivized to support lies.

Not at all clever to pretend this is close call.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:29 PM   #93
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,631
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Here we have the exact intellectual dishonesty that has been used to cover for political malice for years now.

There is a difference between being wrong, being extremely negligent, and lying for political gain knowing it will harm people.
Cuomo was extremely negligent, it got thousands of people directly killed, and then he lied about it for political gain.

Crickets.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:29 PM   #94
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
I see.
So, even at the time they knew that wearing masks was effective for reducing spread- yet claimed that it was not in order to fulfill another agenda. Still, they are not responsible for the spread that could have been prevented by more people wearing masks in the first place- who gets to decide that?

Sounds like a free press to me.
That's an interesting, although patently false, spin on what I said and what happened. You have a promising career at one of the news organizations that you don't want to be held accountable for spreading what they knew to be false causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:31 PM   #95
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 16,460
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Cuomo was extremely negligent, it got thousands of people directly killed, and then he lied about it for political gain.

Crickets.
It's like you don't even watch 'liberal' news. No, not crickets. He's been dragged and is in fact under investigation by Democrats.

You're not doing so well with that argument.

EDIT: If the right wing were even a fraction as good as Dems at holding their own accountable for such things, we wouldn't even need to be looking into things. But they're intellectually and morally bankrupt, so here we are.
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong

Last edited by tyr_13; 24th February 2021 at 12:33 PM.
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:32 PM   #96
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Georgia, USA
Posts: 8,561
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Do you see that word "ever"?

Do you know what it means?

Do you know why I included it?

Defamation laws don't prevent me from ever telling a lie. They aren't supposed to.
Bluster it is! This still undermines your entire stance in this thread, although you clearly aren't capable of seeing that. There is no law or action being presented or asked for which prevents a person from ever telling a lie, and since you now claim that's the crux of your complaint you've kicked your own leg out from under yourself.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:40 PM   #97
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 17,183
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I'm actually a bit frightened by the illiberal, repressive, and downright authoritarian views being expressed here.
What authoritarian views would those be?

To be clear,

I am very uncomfortable with the idea of governments making laws to suppress free speech.

I am perfectly fine with private owners of media outlets exercising their free speech right by choosing not to allow things they disagree with to be published on their platforms.

I am perfectly fine with members of government encouraging and lobbying those private owners of media outlets to exercise their free speech rights.

What surprises me is that an obviousy intelligent and articulate poster such as yourself seems unable to distinguish between these.
__________________
I want to thank the 126 Republican Congress members for providing a convenient and well organized list for the mid-terms.
- Fred Wellman (Senior VA Advisor to The Lincoln Project)
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 24th February 2021 at 12:44 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 12:45 PM   #98
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,631
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
It's like you don't even watch 'liberal' news. No, not crickets. He's been dragged and is in fact under investigation by Democrats.
Crickets here. And the investigation came months after the fact, because nobody wanted to rock the boat before the election. Sure, hold him accountable, but only when it doesn't risk the party.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 01:05 PM   #99
Distracted1
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 5,620
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
What authoritarian views would those be?

To be clear,

I am very uncomfortable with the idea of governments making laws to suppress free speech.

I am perfectly fine with private owners of media outlets exercising their free speech right by choosing not to allow things they disagree with to be published on their platforms.

I am perfectly fine with members of government encouraging and lobbying those private owners of media outlets to exercise their free speech rights.

What surprises me is that an obviousy intelligent and articulate poster such as yourself seems unable to distinguish between these.
Ah. And how about their freedom to choose to allow things that you disagree with?
You seem to have neglected to itemize that one.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 02:07 PM   #100
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 15,361
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
Fully wrong. It wasn't even the group in power at the time who was combating deadly covid information. That they have since gained power should be a clue on that.

The right isn't as clever as you operate on them being. It isn't hard to tell they were lying with extreme callous disregard to if the lies would cause great harm. It helped them politically, so they said it, defended it, and made very silly false equivalences. More than that, they insist everyone pretend it was hard to tell.

Again, this isn't a close call. That deniability isn't plausible.

The real fear is, like all the other issues I listed, reasonable solutions would be found and popular. This would hurt the right who require reality denial to be viable politically right now. Thus the well has to be poisoned. Even looking at the incentives is a violation of the freedom of speech. The real authoritarians aren't the ones trying to illegally and violently overturn elections, but the people who want to tell if companies are incentivized to support lies.

Not at all clever to pretend this is close call.
You know what else isn't clever? Assuming that people who disagree with approaches that strongly suggest an infringement on freedom of the press are "the right" so that you can just dismiss them and don't have to actually consider the effects of this move by some congresspeople.

I'm not on the right.

ETA: Your disingenuous reframing of the issue is also interesting to me. They're not looking to see if the carriers were incentivized to amplify the narrative. They're digging into whether the carriers took punitive action against the press, with the fairly clear subtext that carriers *should* take action against the press. At least, they *should* take action against explicitly and specifically right wing press.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.

Last edited by Emily's Cat; 24th February 2021 at 02:09 PM.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 02:13 PM   #101
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 15,361
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
That's an interesting, although patently false, spin on what I said and what happened. You have a promising career at one of the news organizations that you don't want to be held accountable for spreading what they knew to be false causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands.
Well that's just patently false right there.

Yes, hundreds of thousands have died. But you are implying that all of those who died did so explicitly because these specific news companies caused their deaths directly. Which is just not even a little bit true. I know several people who have gotten covid, some of whom have died. They all got it while wearing a mask any way. Most of them are liberals who don't watch those news channels anyway.

It's flat out false and misleading to try to lay all of the deaths from covid at the feet of a few news outlets - especially when it's abundantly clear that your animosity toward those outlets has a hell of a lot more to do with their political slant than anything else.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 02:26 PM   #102
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 15,361
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
What authoritarian views would those be?

To be clear,

I am very uncomfortable with the idea of governments making laws to suppress free speech.

I am perfectly fine with private owners of media outlets exercising their free speech right by choosing not to allow things they disagree with to be published on their platforms.

I am perfectly fine with members of government encouraging and lobbying those private owners of media outlets to exercise their free speech rights.

What surprises me is that an obviousy intelligent and articulate poster such as yourself seems unable to distinguish between these.
I'm not at all okay with members of the government leveraging their role as government in order to put pressure on carriers of news outlets to infringe on freedom of the press on their behalf.

This is NOT a case of all of the carriers of those news outlets spontaneously saying "gee, we should do something about this". This is members of the government acting as government representatives taking action against cable companies and streaming services in order to get those carriers to infringe on a constitutional right to freedom of the press.

This is akin to the government - as the government - pressuring news-stands to not carry The National Enquirer. Or pressuring Barnes & Noble to not sell books with content they dislike. The government is proscribed from taking action against the author of the book or the publishing agency, and the government is proscribed from taking action against The National Enquirer directly.

So instead, they take action against otherwise impartial sales and delivery platforms. This is the government taking the first steps toward revoking freedom of the press, and controlling news via a third party.

This is something that all of us should be speaking out against.

That so many people are willing (and seemingly eager) to whitewash this and make excuses for it is something that I find deeply troubling.

I disliked Trump's incessant blather about "fake news". Many people on ISF cited freedom of the press against Trump's brain-vomit. But at no point did Trump or his administration actually seek to suppress any of those news outlets in any way. The worst he did was to try to get people to not trust what they were being told. Trump and the republicans sure as hell weren't pressuring internet platforms to ban people referencing that fake news, nor were they going after cable and streaming services that carried those channels.

That the same people crying "freedom of press" against Trump's transparent grandstanding of "fake news" are so willing to justify actions that are clearly implying infringement of the press now is truly disturbing.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 02:34 PM   #103
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,659
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I'm not at all okay with members of the government leveraging their role as government in order to put pressure on carriers of news outlets to infringe on freedom of the press on their behalf.

This is NOT a case of all of the carriers of those news outlets spontaneously saying "gee, we should do something about this". This is members of the government acting as government representatives taking action against cable companies and streaming services in order to get those carriers to infringe on a constitutional right to freedom of the press.

This is akin to the government - as the government - pressuring news-stands to not carry The National Enquirer. Or pressuring Barnes & Noble to not sell books with content they dislike. The government is proscribed from taking action against the author of the book or the publishing agency, and the government is proscribed from taking action against The National Enquirer directly.

So instead, they take action against otherwise impartial sales and delivery platforms. This is the government taking the first steps toward revoking freedom of the press, and controlling news via a third party.

This is something that all of us should be speaking out against.

That so many people are willing (and seemingly eager) to whitewash this and make excuses for it is something that I find deeply troubling.

I disliked Trump's incessant blather about "fake news". Many people on ISF cited freedom of the press against Trump's brain-vomit. But at no point did Trump or his administration actually seek to suppress any of those news outlets in any way. The worst he did was to try to get people to not trust what they were being told. Trump and the republicans sure as hell weren't pressuring internet platforms to ban people referencing that fake news, nor were they going after cable and streaming services that carried those channels.

That the same people crying "freedom of press" against Trump's transparent grandstanding of "fake news" are so willing to justify actions that are clearly implying infringement of the press now is truly disturbing.
I'll try asking one more time.
You keep talking about pressure. What is the specific consequence being threatened is these companies don't do what they are being pressured to do?
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 02:40 PM   #104
Lithrael
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,049
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
(...) you are implying that all of those who died did so explicitly because these specific news companies caused their deaths directly.
Why the constant conflation of ‘many, many deaths’ with ‘all the deaths?’ Nobody here thinks a more on-point response and more responsible media would have been able to eliminate the pandemic’s impact in the US entirely. A lot of us just think it could have gone a whooole lot better, with significantly fewer deaths and illnesses.

I don’t think ‘hundreds of thousands’ is the wrong ballpark.

Last edited by Lithrael; 24th February 2021 at 02:43 PM.
Lithrael is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 02:46 PM   #105
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 25,503
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I'm not at all okay with members of the government leveraging their role as government in order to put pressure on carriers of news outlets to infringe on freedom of the press on their behalf.
While I am nervous about letters like the ones you cite in the OP, I do think we need to avoid overstating the problem. Right now, it's just a letter.

There are rumblings about possible other restrictions, and we should look out for those, and I do tend to agree that some of the responses in the thread suggest a willingness to restrict press freedom, it is all just talk at the moment. I think faced with an actual proposal, a lot of people who are voicing approval in general terms would back off when they actually see the proposed restrictions.

And, unfortunately, not all of them would. There are plenty of people on both the left and the right that would gladly slide toward an authoritarian regime without realizing that's what they are doing.
__________________
Yes, yes. I know you are right. But would it hurt you to provide some information?
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:00 PM   #106
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 28,587
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I'm actually a bit frightened by the illiberal, repressive, and downright authoritarian views being expressed here.
Oh BS. Nothing repressive is happening. This is typical of right wing authoritarian types upset about not everything going their way. Someone is objecting to all our lies.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:03 PM   #107
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 15,361
Originally Posted by Lithrael View Post
Why the constant conflation of ‘many, many deaths’ with ‘all the deaths?’ Nobody here thinks a more on-point response and more responsible media would have been able to eliminate the pandemic’s impact in the US entirely. A lot of us just think it could have gone a whooole lot better, with significantly fewer deaths and illnesses.

I don’t think ‘hundreds of thousands’ is the wrong ballpark.
ONE hundred thousand would be 20% of the total deaths in the US. HUNDREDS of thousands implies 40% or more of the deaths in the US could have been avoided by silencing Fox News etc.

Normalized by population, the US is not materially worse than the UK or most of the EU in terms of Deaths.

Total Deaths normalized by Population
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:08 PM   #108
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,659
Do you guys actually keep forgetting all the things Trump demanded to be cancelled or are you lying?

It really has to be one of the two.

When you say "Oh, I didn't like Trump saying fake news, but that's different than applying pressure..." You either were paying zero attention or you're lying now.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/07/polit...ngs/index.html
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:10 PM   #109
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 18,358
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I'm actually a bit frightened by the illiberal, repressive, and downright authoritarian views being expressed here.
It's almost like they've forgotten how they had the vapors and needed to be helped to a fainting couch over Trump's assault on the media.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:12 PM   #110
Distracted1
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 5,620
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
Do you guys actually keep forgetting all the things Trump demanded to be cancelled or are you lying?

It really has to be one of the two.

When you say "Oh, I didn't like Trump saying fake news, but that's different than applying pressure..." You either were paying zero attention or you're lying now.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/07/polit...ngs/index.html
Nice list of completely okay things Trump said, right.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:21 PM   #111
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,659
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
Nice list of completely okay things Trump said, right.
I'm confused.
Is pressure from government on media to stifle speech ok as you say here?

Or is is a huge problem as you and EC and others say elsewhere in the thread?
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:24 PM   #112
Emily's Cat
Rarely prone to hissy-fits
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: The Wettest Desert on Earth
Posts: 15,361
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
Nice list of completely okay things Trump said, right.
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
I'm confused.
Is pressure from government on media to stifle speech ok as you say here?

Or is is a huge problem as you and EC and others say elsewhere in the thread?
In one case, we;ve got the president spouting off and saying that somebody or other ought to be fired(which I disagree with, by the way), but never actually taking action as the president to follow through on that... .

In the other case, we've got members of congress acting in their capacity as congresspeople to put pressure on carriers to limit the content provided by news organizations on their platforms.

Yeah, those are totally the same thing.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:28 PM   #113
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,330
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
If a publication prints something libelous, it is a duty of the Gov to pursue that publication,
Really?
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:33 PM   #114
Distracted1
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 5,620
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
I'm confused.
Is pressure from government on media to stifle speech ok as you say here?

Or is is a huge problem as you and EC and others say elsewhere in the thread?
Sarcasm.
They are obviously both wrong.

The sarcasm inspired by the offering up of a list of bad actions as a justification for more bad actions.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:36 PM   #115
Distracted1
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 5,620
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
In one case, we;ve got the president spouting off and saying that somebody or other ought to be fired(which I disagree with, by the way), but never actually taking action as the president to follow through on that... .

In the other case, we've got members of congress acting in their capacity as congresspeople to put pressure on carriers to limit the content provided by news organizations on their platforms.

Yeah, those are totally the same thing.
He also threatened openly to "look at their licenses" or some-such while he was calling them "enemies of the people".
Wrong, ill-advised, and an attack on the 1st A.

Somehow, it is supposed to justify the current attempt to do something similar.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:38 PM   #116
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 12,330
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
I fail to see how this is anything but toothless bluster. Congress can't enact any law forcing these companies stop carrying misinformation, no matter how blatant it is. The cable execs may as use these complaints as toilet paper.
My first thought. None of these companies answer to the federal government.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:40 PM   #117
Elaedith
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,536
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
He also threatened openly to "look at their licenses" or some-such while he was calling them "enemies of the people".
Wrong, ill-advised, and an attack on the 1st A.

Somehow, it is supposed to justify the current attempt to do something similar.
Whataboutism.
__________________
Those who have virtue always in their mouths, and neglect it in practice, are like a harp which emits a sound pleasing to others, while itself is insensible of the music. - Diogenes
Elaedith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:49 PM   #118
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,659
Originally Posted by Distracted1 View Post
Sarcasm.
They are obviously both wrong.

The sarcasm inspired by the offering up of a list of bad actions as a justification for more bad actions.
I was specifically responding to posters here, the OP particularly who drew a distinction between Trump's actions towards the media and these letters and came to the conclusion that Trump's threats did not constitute pressure but these letters do.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:52 PM   #119
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,659
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
In one case, we;ve got the president spouting off and saying that somebody or other ought to be fired(which I disagree with, by the way), but never actually taking action as the president to follow through on that... .

In the other case, we've got members of congress acting in their capacity as congresspeople to put pressure on carriers to limit the content provided by news organizations on their platforms.

Yeah, those are totally the same thing.
For starters:

Quote:
October 2017: Suggesting he could use the power of the state against media entities he dislikes, Trump muses about challenging the broadcast licenses of NBC and other networks over their news coverage. (He again broached the subject of reviewing NBC's license in September 2018.)
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th February 2021, 03:54 PM   #120
Distracted1
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 5,620
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
I was specifically responding to posters here, the OP particularly who drew a distinction between Trump's actions towards the media and these letters and came to the conclusion that Trump's threats did not constitute pressure but these letters do.
A wrong conclusion.
They both constitute pressure.

The difference was one was a "bully pulpit" type of pressure .Real- but different from pressure through official channels- as in the tone of the letter from the Congressmembers.
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure.
Distracted1 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:34 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.