I confess to back pedaling into Trump territory when I wanted to leave discussions about him in the garbage can. My thread on the read-only break room site has 9,600 replies so I thought I'd bring up a new one.
He's not going away.
Haberman's book is out based on interviews. I won't read it, but the excerpts are interesting. Especially what he says about McConnell, a description that's against the Terms of Service here, but I actually don't disagree with. LOL
Quote
“At one point, Trump made a candid admission that was as jarring as it was ultimately unsurprising. ‘The question I get asked more than any other question: “If you had it to do again, would you have done it?”’Trump said of running for president. ‘The answer is, yeah, I think so. Because here’s the way I look at it. I have so many rich friends and nobody knows who they are.’ … Reflecting on the meaning of having been president of the United States, his first impulse was not to mention public service, or what he felt he’d accomplished, only that it appeared to be a vehicle for fame, and that many experiences were only worth having if someone else envied them.”
That's a tangent I wasn't going down. The owners of private websites should set the Terms of Service and how they moderate themselves and if one doesn't like that, then stay away from that website. You can disagree with that idea.
I do agree that it's up to us as individuals to decide based on what we see and read what truth we choose to believe in and promote.
The administrators here I think in the political forums allow for a bit more grey and they allow us to debunk each other's information back and forth.
But you certainly don't see a lot of posts such as "shark cartilage is the cure for cancer and the government is trying to cover it up", or "the covid vaccines are going to implant tracker devices"...etc.
They do a decent job of creating an environment without racism, homophobia and bullying, even if some things might fall through the cracks every now and then. Maybe you should post on the Admin Help Page your offer of your services. Maybe they could use another moderator. I was a moderator once and I had the politic forums in my assignment. I hated hated hated it and ultimately resigned. LOL
I pretty much agree with you in that private websites should be able to do what they want by their own rules and policies.
Kamala Harris seems to believe that they should have some oversight.
So, who shall be the arbitror of such information?
We're constantly exposed to false information from social media, news media, talk radio, when politicians talk, our colleagues at work, in line at the coffee shop, etc. It's up to us to determine what the truth is.
How many members are on AN? Is AN going to be subject to oversight by a Harris administration? How is this going to work?
Actually. I do have idea. AN should be required to hire a disinformation czar. I would be perfect for the position. My team would replace the moderators, and we'd weed out all the false information posted in these forums before anyone else ever laid their eyeballs on it.
Right? Who decoded what disinformation and what is nit?
Hunter Biden laptop was considered "disinformation " and then it was found to be true.
So how would we determine this? Who would decide?
This is the same premise of free speech but with the new implications of social media. Compounded with private owned massive media platforms.
All speech must be permitted because no one entity can be trusted to decide what is disinformation and what is not.
I feel large media platforms are not just private business. Not in the context of what we know in history. No one could have predicted the influence of these platforms.
The only solution is to have absolute free speech. Or until a better solution is found. To date in all of history, there has not been a better solution. This does not bypass new technology.
(Free speech in the context of the law. Of course incitement and threats of violence is not free speech).
In this country, we decided long ago that we would develop and fund our own experts in all of the important fields of sstudy and research. We have long depended upon our CDC and NIH and the like to advise us in issues of public health.
Yes and long ago as a free country we wrote in the right to free speech.
Long ago agencies who determined that mercury and lead in cosmetic was the best medical practice, would not have been challenged and more people would have been harmed without freedom of speech. The CDC couldn't of become what it is because the opposition would not allow it. However because of freedom of speech, we know now because the people had freedom to question and challenge the current medial practice of the time. Without this freedom, mercury and lead would have killed many people.
Medical science is always to be challenged and developed. It's fundemental to develop and discover new treatments and cures. We would not have the advanced medical technology we have today if medical science was not constantly being challenged. It's call the scientific method.
Not saying stupid post on social media is the same thing but it's still applies to the fundamental idea of freedom of speech.
Our constitution states that we are to question our government and hold it accountable to the people. It is no longer a free country when it is forbidden to question our government. It leads to tyranny. Source-history.
I think private companies should be able to say what they allow on their social media platforms. If Facebook doesn't allow hate speech such as "kill the Jews because they killed Christ" or "pedophilia is not a crime" that's their right and too bad if it infringes upon the posters "free speech".
We all know how "Trump won the election, let's go to Washington and Stop the Steal" turned out. At the end of the day if a social media platform decides after no proof that Trump won the election wants to end that on their platform, that's their right.
I love the foundation we have of freedom of speech and press. The press is free to criticize Biden and the government ad lib without fear, unlike some other countries. Writers are free to publish all kinds of literature and commentary. Social media platforms are also a place that isn't really all that particular about allowing all kinds of people and opinions.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
This is definitely a conundrum. All of us value the freedom of speech enshrined in that first amendment. We've all also seen the divisive and costly effects of rampant and intentional disinformation and misinformation campaigns. This evolution is difficult and interesting.
Free but reckless speech most certainly contributed to our excessive covid deaths.
Free but malicious speech most certainly convinced people that the 2020 election was stolen or somehow fraudulent when that isn't remotely true. Freedom of speech has convinced Americans not to trust a number of our institutions and has Russian propaganda flowing freely through our social media.
My view is that we should improve public awareness of bad info and public ability to critically analyze quality of information needs to be elevated. How does the government accomplish that when so many people believe the propaganda that tells them that the government is not to be trusted?
It's a dangerous time when tens of millions of Americans believe nefarious lies and refuse to accept evidence contrary to their beliefs.
Same old same old....Trump on Truth Social yesterday.
Some of us are still waiting for your proof. Sounds like he's going to wait until he's President again. Not sure why he didn't do this years ago.
Quote
WHEN I WIN, those people that CHEATED will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the Law, which will include long term prison sentences so that this Depravity of Justice does not happen again. Please bewarethat this legal exposure extends to Lawyers, Political Operatives, Donors, Illegal Voters, & Corrupt Election Officials. Those involved in unscrupulous behavior will be sought out, caught, and prosecuted at levels, unfortunately, never seen before in our Country.”
He told his fan club that retribution was important to his second term and they don't require proof. In fact, most "proof" directly contradicts what they believe about Trump.
No. I only have streaming services on Amazon and Netflix. I'm sure as always she has a lot to say. I did read an article on The Hill that she was urging Republicans that are going to vote for Harris to publicly say they are going to do so. I heard hell froze over when her father said he'd vote for Harris.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Tweety said:
No. I only have streaming services on Amazon and Netflix. I'm sure as always she has a lot to say. I did read an article on The Hill that she was urging Republicans that are going to vote for Harris to publicly say they are going to do so. I heard hell froze over when her father said he'd vote for Harris.
I watch this program on my free TV antennae. I generally only get to watch the first half because the local CBS always cuts to bull riding or whatever sports entertainment is available.
I think that Cheney said that Trump is deranged in this interview.
Beerman, BSN
4,428 Posts
I pretty much agree with you in that private websites should be able to do what they want by their own rules and policies.
Kamala Harris seems to believe that they should have some oversight.