[Official] Censorship from governmental actors thread

I think there is something to consider that "fake news" mainly comes from unreliable sources and media publishing channels.

 

Is it? Science is pretty structured here.

 

Anyone who understands science knows that there’s a food chain
And 99ers are on top of the Clutchfans food chain

suckers like jaggy are at the bottom

 

Are you saying the risk to free speech is how someone might be taught to see what is fake and real news? In that case, I still do not see how someone freedom of speech is suppressed.

Your main concern seems to be with "experts" designing courses (which still has little to do with free speech IMO). But we do have "experts" designing courses forever. I think we all have our differences of opinion on what curriculum is being taught and how and what content are being taught within those curriculums but in general, we accept it as not perfect, but good enough. I see media literacy in a similar boat.

Getting outside of generality, here are some details below. I have no issue with either of those as they seem reasonable.


TX department of education on media literacy:
https://txssc.txstate.edu/topics/digital-safety/articles/media-literacy

...
Media Literacy Education
Media literacy education is intended to enhance awareness and understanding of meaning within media messages,7 thereby enabling individuals to become responsible processers, users, and creators of media content.6 One major objective, then, is to bolster critical thinking skills. An effective method for doing this is to increase young people's skepticism of constructed media messages.2

Studies have found the implementation of media literacy education to be successful by positively influencing students' media knowledge, critical thinking, perceived realism of mediated narratives, awareness of media influence, attitudes toward media content, behaviors related to media exposure, and self-efficacy.12 However, an obstacle challenging educators is managing and avoiding unintended consequences of media literacy education.

Conclusion
Media literacy education is proven effective for making children more aware, active, and responsible when using media. Important points for educators to keep in mind include:

• 
  
  
  • the shift toward an empowerment perspective on media literacy that upholds children's autonomy and creativity
  • the importance of teaching children how to think critically and to skeptically process media messages
  • the need to avoid unnecessary exposure to negative media content within media literacy curricula

...​

I think this is the proposed bill on media literacy that Turley was against.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB155

...
51226.8.
(a) The Instructional Quality Commission shall develop, and the state board shall adopt, reject, or modify, a model curriculum for pupils in kindergarten and in grades 1 to 12, inclusive, in media literacy, for voluntary use by educators. The curriculum shall incorporate evidence-based and applied instructional practices for developing media literacy skills, and shall identify the ways in which the model curriculum aligns with, and is supportive of, the Common Core state standards.

(b) The model curriculum shall address safe and strategic uses of online and other media resources, and shall provide instruction on how to apply critical thinking skills when consuming or producing media in any form. The model curriculum shall address, but not necessarily be limited to, the instruction of pupils in how to accomplish all of the following:
(1) Safely and responsibly use media.
(2) Analyze media content in a critical way.
(3) Evaluate the quality and credibility of media content.
(4) Integrate or apply media literacy skills in other content areas.
(5) Produce media in a variety of forms.

(c) Content relating to the ability of pupils to analyze and evaluate media shall address the ability of pupils to think critically about information found on Internet Web sites. Specifically, the model curriculum shall instruct pupils on how to accomplish all of the following:
(1) Judge the credibility and quality of information found on Internet Web sites, including social media Web sites.
(2) Identify credible sources online.
(3) Identify the source of charts or pictures shared on social media platforms.
(4) Determine whether an article is a news story or a sponsored post.
(5) Distinguish between news stories and opinion columns.
(6) Verify claims made in articles on online Web sites or social media platforms.
(7) Evaluate evidence in articles on online sites or in social media platforms to determine the trustworthiness of a source.

​

...​

 

But how does that impact someone freedom of speech?

Freedom of speech isn't a freedom to be heard by others. If someone is taught to ignore you, that's not a suppression of your speech. You can still say whatever, but you might be ignored.

 

Meaning that science is objective - there really isn't a valid perspective on climate change that is labeled "fake news" from my understanding

 

I don't know who Michael Shellenberger is to be honest. But so longs the facts he is using are accurate and not being misconstrued or misinterpreted then it isn't fake news. But that's the key about fake news - it's not about perspective, it's about how truthful the piece is.

 

There's shouldn't be a disagreement on the truth unless there contradictory hard evidence. Everything else is an interpretation of that fundamental data.

If that data is being interpreted in a way that is clearly flawed, then that interpretation is clearly flawed as well. I see this happen a great deal, where people take facts and then stitch them together in a new way that is false because it's taking data points out of context.

But if you have a peer reviewed study that shows clear data then that is the foundation for truth.

Saying that we shouldn't be alarmist about global warming isn't fake news because its not a statement that can be judged to be true or false - it's an opinion. Stating that global warming is a hoax and based on manufactured data is clearly false and can be labeled fake news.

 

Regardless, they shouldn't be brought into a publically funded classroom.

 

I have a way of thinking that doesn't see how it involves free speech. If you somehow were able to change how I think and agree with you, it's still not suppression of anyone's speech. It's just changing how I think.

Freedom of speech - "freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction" (wiki). Teaching kids what to think (which to be clear isn't what is proposed or going on, but let's just assume the worst case here) doesn't mean retaliation, censorship or legal sanction against an individual or a community for articulating their opinion.

You have not shown how teaching someone what to think is suppression of someone's free speech. As I said before it can be propaganda. NK teaching about kids how godlike their leader is propaganda. NK jailing you and removing your stated comments that criticize that teaching is suppression of speech. Two different things.

 

Truth is

@pgabriel is a smarter and better person than Jaggy

 

@Os Trigonum since free speech is something you are high on, here are a few suppressions of speech by the gov with teeth on private entity you want to be aware of. I don't see Turley picking up these.


https://www.gtlaw.com/en/insights/2...-law-has-ramifications-beyond-political-realm

On May 24, 2021, Florida Gov. DeSantis signed Senate Bill 7072 (the Act), restricting the ability of social media companies to “deplatform” a candidate running for public office in Florida. See Fla. Stat. §§ 106.072, 501.2041. While the law is principally directed toward prohibiting willful censorship of political candidates, the law has potential ramifications for social media companies, businesses, and individuals beyond the political realm. The Act defines “deplatform” as “the action or practice by a social media platform[1] to permanently delete or ban a user or to temporarily delete or ban a user from the social media platform for more than 14 days.”

As to political candidates, the Act applies from the date the candidate qualifies for office through the date of the election or when the candidate otherwise ceases to be a candidate. When this law goes into effect on July 1, 2021, the statute permits the Florida Elections Commission to fine violators $250,000 per day for a candidate for statewide office and $25,000 per day for a candidate for “other offices.”[2]​

https://www.kawc.org/post/arizona-s...ia-practices-seek-campaign-finance-violations

PHOENIX -- State senators voted Wednesday to spend $500,000 to investigate the practices of social media platforms and search engines to see if they are violating campaign finance laws.

And that could lead to legal problems for them.

But the most unusual provision is that $500,000 for a newly created Unreported In-Kind Political Contributions Task Force Fund.

It is specifically charged with investigating whether and to what extent the practices of social media platforms and internet search engines effectively become in-kind political contributions to a candidate, meaning the donation of not cash but some service with financial value. That drew questions from Sen. Juan Mendez, D-Tempe.

"Am I going to have to start reporting retweets as in-kind contributions?'' he asked.


​