Obama Says Internet, Social Media Are Threat To Democracy

Nor did my post to which you responded say anything about Trump.

Easy to forget. Done.

 

I think we as individuals need to learn and practice "buyer beware", or as they said in Latin, "Caveat Emptor".

I wonder why such simple wisdom in not included in lesson plans in our education system? Why does not our illustrious, benign and wise media encourage such thinking? How many parents instruct their children to be skeptical of what they see?

 

Our education should enable critical thinking skills. It does not.

At one point in US history a classical liberal arts education at the college level was designed to facilitate critical thinking. Now education is designed to prepare people to have job skills, i.e., more training than education.

As you point out the government/media complex is crafted to provoke. To provoke a reaction to be sure. But I see it as perception management and information warfare. The same techniques used in other countries and described in this book.

https://www.amazon.com/Legacy-of-As...05807516&sprefix=CIA+legacy+of,aps,147&sr=8-3

 

Those who believe in Republicanism and/or Classical Liberalism are for the rule of law and the "Constitution" - and the founding principles which are to be used to interpret law and the constitution in this nation.

The GOP is an anathema to Republicanism - the Rule of Law, founding principles, constitution. How is Assange these days and what is Red doing for him other than violating the rule of law - among other things such as attacking freedom of the press, information, speech.

Did we not send our Goblins after this individual ? Maybe one day the Goblins will come for you - due to something you said online - maybe for me. That we are even having to have this conversation tells us the canaries on the coal mine of totalitarianism are screeching to the top of their lungs.

And of course Blue is now an anathema to Classical Liberalism.

 

Obama Says Internet, Social Media Are Threat To Democracy
All my life the First Amendment, guaranteeing freedom of speech, has been the core freedom marking America as a great nation. There have always been individuals & even groups of people willing to abuse that freedom in their effort to distort truth. But until the Internet, those attempts all failed. Today, Facebook & others are succeeding in spreading abuse of both truth & the first amendment, with a result that turns the blood cold. Misinformation now has a global microphone, & those with no commitment to, or interest in truth, are spreading lies that are dividing this nation & creating increasing havoc around the world. Now, for the first time, freedom of speech itself, is the source of a major threat to the unity & stability of America, along with other nations & cultures. For those of us who care deeply about freedom of speech, this development is a painful reminder that everything good can be used for bad purposes. It is extremely difficult to even consider placing restrictions to freedom of speech, but unless we do something, those spreading misinformation with the intent to destroy democracies globally, will succeed in their goals. It is a sickening thought, but some sort of media censorship against misinformation may have to be invented, but that leads to the inevitable question of setting the new standards, & what qualifies as acceptable vs unacceptable. And that, is a whole new box of worms.

 

You have a depressing world view, & one I completely disagree with. From my perspective, it is our small wealthiest families who control our country--always was--but their controls have increased over time, along with their wealth, till now it is almost total. Our President says he's a billionaire; our Senators are all millionaires; most of our Congresspeople are millionaires; most governors & state legislators are too. Laws are passed to benefit the rich over the poor. Media outlets are all owned & controlled by billionaires & millionaires, & their message is always the same--Capitalism is good; Socialism is bad. Capitalism maintains the status quo. Socialism attempts to use government to help the common workers more. That's poison to the wealthy, so they use every means within their power to block anything advancing the worker classes. Under Trump this has been magnified even more. One measure of their success is that 72 million average Americans voted for Trump, who has NEVER felt any inclination toward improving the lives of average Americans. The fact that so many Americans can be misled into believing otherwise, is deeply disturbing. I share your concerns for the end of America, but it's not leftists doing the damage. It's the wealthy Capitalists like Trump, who care only for themselves.

 

Thanks for that insight. If I had to bet, I would bet that there are very few like you left in the public school system in the US. Likely there are none like you.

So many youngsters we encounter these days cannot do simple arithmetic without a calculator. English and reading skills are also deficient, and critical thinking is a college level class if it exists at all.

 

Capitalism is good and socialism is bad, in my opinion. Socialism has never worked. The only thing that happens is that people vote in Socialists who promise up front to legally steal money from earners and "spread it" around "equitably". That never happens. Socialists just transfer money from free-market workers to their own pockets. It's a lot less work to be a Socialist dictator who can steal money than to build a capitalist company which produces something of value and provides honest jobs to people.

Why would a politician be any more altruistic than a businessman? People take care of their family and friends. That's human nature. Socialist politicians are just lazier crooks who have figured out an easy road to extreme wealth.

 

I offer the various Democratic Socialist countries of W Europe as a counter to your post--especially Denmark, which has been noted as the "happiest country in the world" for several years. You're simply repeating the propaganda fed to us for generations by our wealthy elite Capitalists. With the ever increasing disparity between them & the rest of us, your argument loses its impact.

 

I agree with much of what you wrote, but IMO, the federal government has no scope to get involved in what policies a for-profit company decides to have. It's totally up to FB what content they do/don't allow. If they came out with a no-dog picture policy, it would be stupid, but shouldn't be discussed by Congress.

I've been hearing for a few years, from Republicans, that FB should be made a government controlled monopoly. The problem is, there is literally no barrier to entry for a social media site. Someone went ahead and proved me right. Now we have Parler.

Let the free market decide.

I'm only on FB for two games I like. I post cute cat pics sometimes. I don't get involved in politics, and I certainly don't use FB for news.

 

When the kids were growing up, every night at dinnertime was a chance to help develop their bullshit detectors. Isn't that what family dinnertime is for?

 

You're speaking of capitalist countries which have a broader safety net than we have. Denmark is not a socialist country.

If we want to expand the safety net here, then we need to reduce either debt or spending to pay for increased spending on social benefits. The Democrats want to spend more without any plans to cut other spending or reduce debt. Also, if we broaden the safety net, then we certainly cannot also open the borders to any migrants/refugees/asylees who will be dependent on that safety net. Migrants, who we welcome, need to be pre-qualified to be able to contribute to the system and not be a burden to it. The Democrat Party does not have their math worked out, and that makes them unelectable from my standpoint.

Anyway, you're basically not a proponent of Socialism in using Denmark as an example.

 

I have not heard that Republicans want to make social media a government controlled monopoly. Sounds more like what Democrats are aiming for, after listening to the hearing this week.

This has become a government issue since Democrat leaders have been demanding that FB/Twitter ban/censor/silence certain people and groups. Republicans have chimed in to say that FB/Twitter are not responsible for whatever groups or people say or do on their platform, as long as they operate as a platform rather than a publisher. Republicans are merely saying "Let everyone talk, or else we will take away your legal protections as a platform and allow people to bring lawsuits for harm/liable/slander etc."

 

How can they "demand," anything? Congress doesn't have the right to set policies for companies.

Is a newspaper a platform? Are they required to post every letter to the editor they get? This doesn't mesh with me.

Facebook should be allowed to have it's own code of conduct.

The thing that confuses me about the claims, though, is that I see people making obviously untrue claims.

My republican friends might post a picture of the American flag, with a note like, "Facebook has removed this from my feed three times, now. Let's see if they'll let this one stay."

And, it's just a total fabrication. You go back two months later, and the flag is still there. (no pun intended.)

The flag is just one example. Other things republicans claim FB doesn't allow, by claiming posts are removed? Merry Christmas, I'm proud to be a gun owner / I support the 2nd, memes that make up ridiculous lies about democrats.... None of that gets taken down, as is getting claimed.

 

Yes, they can "demand" anything through writing legislation, getting enough votes and an Executive sign-off.

A legislative fight is starting now over social media and "what to do with them". Whatever they do will surely make a bigger mess than if they leave things as is, but that's our trusted government. We trust them to muck up everything they touch.

 

I do believe the W European countries refer to themselves as "Socialist" or what Bernie calls "Democratic Socialist." Most Americans have been brainwashed by Cold War propaganda that stuck after the Cold War ended, saying that Socialist countries & Communist countries were the same. They ARE NOT. Socialism is just another, kinder, gentler, more compassionate form of Capitalism. Communist doesn't allow Capitalism to exist. They're not the same. They're not even related.

But semantics aside, I don't really care whether you call these W European countries "Socialist" or "Capitalists with a broader safety net." I like them & their system better than the one we currently have. I think every working American deserves a retirement system that works for them for life, & follows them to every job they ever work for & provides them a living wage when they retire. I think every American worker deserves access to healthcare, whether they are employed or between employers. I think every American should have housing provided them at a price they can afford, & for free if they are temporarily unemployed or incapable of employment. I think every American worker deserves a paid 6 weeks vacation annually. I think every American family should be guaranteed access to affordable child care to free them up for work. I think every American should have access to free education thru Jr. College level. I don't care whether these things are provided under a Capitalist or a Socialist system. I just want them provided.

 

Facebook & some other media streams have been irresponsible, allowing lies & misinformation a microphone to weaken & possibly destroy the very same First Amendment so many of us claim to love & want to protect. Before the Internet, it was easy to allow anyone a voice to say anything they wished, but it didn't affect millions of people around the world. The Internet changed that, & now there are malcontents & mentally challenged individuals who are spreading hatred, fear, dishonesty, untruths, & distrust to anyone willing to listen. Unfortunately, many are willing. This creates anger, hostility, mistrust, & potential violence thru many societies, endangering everyone, increasing tensions & stresses, & opening the door to possible wars. Freedom of speech is a very valuable human right, but the right to live--& live in peace is even greater.

 

Just like every other time period, we let people talk except for obvious death threats, and arrest people for committing actual crimes. The right to free speech should always be defended, especially speech we don't like. If I get to choose personally, Antifa and most elected Democrats would be banned. I think Kamala is a danger. She should be silenced. Sound ridiculous?

You might choose different people or groups. Someone else might think other people or groups are "dangerous" from who you or I think. So tell me, who exactly gets to define "hatred, fear, and dishonesty"? Who decides who gets silenced?

 

I can't imagine how they will legislate an industry that has literally no barriers to entry.

Do I have a right to post nonstop posts about Russian architecture on cruisecritic.com forums?

Can I post nonstop on the Catholic forum about how much Jesus sucks?

Can I post about moon landing conspiracies on my pizza cooking forum?

Or, are they allowed to make their own rules on what sort of content is allowed?

If the entire social aspect of the internet gets bogged down in laws by Congress, There will be no difference between any internet forum. Alex Jones' platform will look the same as the pizza forum, the gardening forum, the cruise forum, etc.

 

Sounds like your Constitution should be called "My Way or The Highway Constitution". Our Constitution came out of English Law into the Articles of Confederation and then into the Constitution. We have over time amended our Constitution and continue to this day discuss and question parts of it.

 

I agree very much, but the pragmatist must admit that what George Bush said was a fact--it is a piece of paper that nobody honors anymore.

 

When social media starts acting like journalists and censure free speech and wish to dictate how we can think and talk then they should lose protection from lawsuits and be culpable as regular media.

 

"Obama Says Internet, Social Media Are Threat To Democracy"

False, Obama did not say that or anything like it. He said the specific actions of people living this fantasy of extreme right wingers are using social media to attack our democracy. That is true, accurate and a critically important point.