The tech companies would have the most insight to how adversaries would use technology to spread propaganda. This part is great work and smart thinking by the FBI and Homeland Security
But you were A-OK with all the Russian disinformation going on throughout the 2016 and 2020 elections. The stuff that was actually proven.
What is "this"? "Disinformation Governance Board" is inherently so politicized already, it's hard to know what we are talking about anymore.
I'll just quote the intercept article from the other page Seems like an on the nose over the top pathway for a mess of authoritarianism and privacy infringement. Politically dividing on this seems like a bad idea.
I'm not troubled by that without more details (it's too subjective and not clear exactly what is overboard here). The gov has always worked with the private sector. Some may interpret that as pressure, and some might see it as cooperation. Overboard can go both ways - preventing good work between gov and the private sector and too much pressure on the private sector. It's a fine line, but one that is somewhat necessary. But I'm troubled by this: "DHS justifies these goals — which have expanded far beyond its original purview on foreign threats to encompass disinformation originating domestically". It should stop at foreign threats.
The report said Trump didn't collude with the Russians. It did not say there was no Russian interference. I know reading comprehension isn't your strong suit so you are excused.
Welp, regulatory capture already exists in several key agencies. Gotta draw the line somewhere... Hope the bar is raised in our concepts of free speech vs harmful speech. We shouldn't use other nations as a first hand reference.
