Isn’t that the guy that keeps exposing himself to children?
In his child-trafficking van with the Klan stickers on the back?
Removed by mod
oh yeah! it was in the background when he did that interview where he forgot the mic was live and said “voters are all dumb cunts god i can’t wait to get my hands on all that sweet tax money so i can piss it away on tropical holidays and boats”
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Shove enough meth into him to OD his brainless head
I can’t wait until the onion gets infowars
Removed by mod
I’m pretty sure impersonating people could result in defamation.
Removed by mod
yeah but when was the last time you heard someone win a defamation case
Misinformation laws can quickly get 1984-ish. In the US both political parties have different ideas on what’s true and what’s misinformation, I don’t really like the idea of criminalizing “misinformation” when the accepted narrative will change every 4-8 years.
Edit: Surprisingly, this is now one of my most downvoted comments ever on Lemmy. Do you guys really want the government deciding what you can or can’t say online?
I agree with the potential for Orwellian uses, and I agree with the need for SOME kind of repercussion for active misinformation peddling and manipulation of the masses. (As opposed to honest mistakes).
Like all things in this world, I feel topics like this are nuanced and the current need to make everything into a chalk/cheese divisive issue is counter productive. I feel we need mature people who can navigate that nuance without the need for forced polarisation of the topics.
I’ll also add some context for people outside of Australia:
The Onion / Shovel headline is cunning, as locals with knowledge will tell you the target of the the parody article (Peter Dutton) is a well known user of defamation suits to go after people who say things about him he feels are untrue.
Also worth noting that eventually, common sense and rationality prevailed:
“can get” implies there’s examples of like misinfo laws becoming orwellian. I cannot find such examples. Laws that penalize people for knowingly lying for profit, clout, etc tend to curb bombastic discourse. These standards are common in defamation suits. Extending them to more media makes sense.
What’s always orwellian is like anti terrorism laws where laws intended to curb oppositional rhetoric or groups become applied on large swaths of people.
The actual laws they prosecuted Assange for, for instance were anti espionage laws if I recall.
Obvious examples are countries like Russia, China, North Korea, etc. Russia specifically passed laws banning misinformation in 2020, and later fined google millions of dollars over it.
Yeah. To me the misinformation conversation just sounds like”why are the poors talking to each other instead of listening to US?”
If we had a misinformation law in 2001, would it have applied to the news outlets or gov officials who were lying about the Iraq war?
There is A real problem in how we sort out second hand evidence, it’s just that this problem didn’t magically start when social media became a thing and it won’t be fixed by returning authority to those same old institutions who were lying to us in the past.
Removed by mod
Sure, and this one probably wasn’t great but also the article shows why there’s of course a valuable line
This what they want…
Their real crimes to be drowned out by bullshit, so voters just write everything off as misinformation when it’s a Republican, but “proof” if it’s about a Dem.
Funny headline tho
This what they want…
Their real crimes to be drowned out by bullshit, so voters just write everything off as misinformation when it’s a Republican, but “proof” if it’s about a Dem.
Funny headline tho
Peter Dutton is neither a Republican nor a Democrat, he’s an Australian politician.
Funny comment tho
Eh. Same plot, different casting.
For someone that’s constantly in every US politics comments section talking shit, you don’t even know who is a US politician and who isn’t.
The loudest know the least, same as ever.
It’s okay to just admit you don’t know who Peter Dutton is and also don’t even know enough about US politics to realize who is and isn’t part of American political discourse.
To be fair though, Dutton and the Liberal party are pretty closely aligned politically with Republicans, they just have to tone it down to not scare off the more moderate voters.
I did…
But I don’t think any interaction we have is going to be productive
I did…
No, you didn’t.
But I don’t think any interaction we have is going to be productive
There’s something we can agree on. Bye bye now 👋
