Noah Webster?
Good thing England doesn’t still guarantee trial by jury!
It’s really not that hard to define truth. Our courts do it all the time. IN fact, there you go: you lie, someone can sue you for misleading the public using false information in a political campaign.
Of course, there will be a lot of lawsuits, so a bi-partisan fact checking committee will have to be created. Voluntarily running your information through them will absolve you of responsibility if they let a lie go through.
There will, of course, be a lot of trading, since one party will not want the other party’s damaging message to go through unless they get a damaging piece of information themselves.
Are there flaws, sure. But it’s a lot better than the conservative idea that nothing can possibly work. And people wonder why intellectuals are by and large liberal–intellectuals at least try novel solutions to problems–something every intellectual has to do every day.
Or, you know, we just let people think for themselves. If they’re dumb and easily mislead, well, hopefully they’ll die off. If not, then think of a way to mislead them to your own benefit.
People are stupid. All of us, in one way or another. There’s no protecting us from ourselves.
But they won’t die off, and they won’t think for themselves. They’ll make important, society-affecting decision based on disinformation–history has proven this time and again.
I realize the problem is that I am a self-important, belligerant asshole who doesn’t believe a good portion of humanity is fit to make decisions for themselves, let alone millions of other people. But that doesn’t mean lying to manipulate others is not still wrong.
What you’re looking for are Hate Speech laws. The kind that make Ann Coulter tremble with anti socialist indignity when she visits here.
Say something once, you get a pass as uninformed. It gets proven wrong and you’re not wise enough to desist, that’s spreading Hate Speech, and you could get yourself in some hot water.
One thing it definitely does, is shift the focus, from the lying attention whoring speakers, onto whether it is demonstratively true or false. That tiny thing, changes the entire dynamic of how such things play out, in countries with such legislation.
Start talking some trash and laser focus is suddenly shone on the actual veracity of your words, instead of someone sticking a mic in your face so you can just spew some more.
Canada has a provision in their law that prohibits false or misleading news. This has kept FOX News from broadcasting in Canada.
Free speech in Canada however remains alive and well.
As for advertising I thought we had truth in advertising laws in the US:
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you…the liberal platform.
A hundred years ago most intellectuals in America thought that Eugenics was “objectively” true.
Unfortunately what is and isn’t “misleading” is very much in the eye of the beholder.
There are lots of people who believe that “the mainstream media’s” reports are biased against right-wingers and I’m not sure I’d like idea of bureaucrats or judges who agree with such attitudes deciding what is and isn’t “misleading”.
Nice try, but the description works for both sides of the political coin as well as the fringe independents. Got anything germain to the OP, or did you just want to take a drive-by cheap shot?
just one more reason I want to move to Canada!