Let us speak of heresy....
Free speech, like democracy itself is based on the idea that most people are intelligent, informed and genuine. When too many are not, those who are not genuine manipulate the others. We regulate substances (drugs for example) to prevent their misuse. I believe that we need to do the same with our media and those individuals who are in position to unduly influence others. For example, politicians aught to be held to a much higher standard regarding thier free speach. It should be required that they what they be based on facts (I didn't say truth on purpose) that can be verified. The same standard should also be applied to all media because they are also in position to unduly influence a large portion of the population.
What say you?
1
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
6 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.What do you expect, when media around the world is owned by a handful of people.
Jolanta
Level 9
Dec 19, 2018
1
Agreed. They are monied interests.
There is no one who can be trusted to regulate speech. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
To me it is really terrible what has happened to many or most of our universities, which used to be bastions of free speech, and now are politically correct breeding grounds for fascism.
doug6352
Level 7
Dec 19, 2018
1
I disagree. People (jury's) can be trusted to regulate through the courts. The issue I see is the creation of the applicable laws.
nah. Educate the masses. People still need to believe whatever they want. Just help them get the tools think critically and figure out what they will choose to believe
maxhyde
Level 7
Dec 19, 2018
0
I agree that education could be a part of the answer. In my opinion, many, many people receive thier "post school" l education from media sources. So, we have media mis-educationing the public.
It's only free speech until it violates a citizen's civil rights, at which point it becomes, at best, not free speech, and at worst, hate speech when used to frighten and intimidate. I consider hate speech to be a form of terrorism.
godef
Level 7
Dec 19, 2018
1
I agree. I believe that the speach that I propose requires regulation, is intended to frighten and intimidate/manipulate. So, my proposition is that "hate" speach should be regulated.
What you say would be nice but hard to implement. (MASA)
Make America smart again ?
oldFloyd
Level 8
Dec 19, 2018
1
I don't disagree. The question is how. Certainly our current environment proves we, as a society, have failed to do so.
@Jay1313132018 I would substitute failed for chosen
I've never believed in free speech for the sake of free speech. And speech is regulated already to some extent.
I agree that the politicians should be held accountable to what they say, based on facts. But that is called the election and democracy. How else can it be regulated?
That is the role supposedly belonging to the free press, the counterpart of the free speech. But the press is not free.
This is just a matter of power imbalance. That needs to be solved.
AtheistReader
Level 7
Dec 19, 2018
0
I can't disagree. However, our present state indicates that our processes have failed.
The power imbalance is a symptom of our present system. To fix the imbalance, people must be made to "realize" the problem. But, people are mis-educated by our media and monied interests.
Quite a dilema.
Enjoy being online again!
Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.Create your free account
Share this post
Related Groups More
Memes R Us
3036 members
Categories
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.