Supreme Court allows White House to fight social media misinformation::Justices said the Biden Administration could continue to pressure social media firms over misleading content while a lawsuit progresses.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Demonstrably false foreign propaganda? Lies about the time, place, and results of elections? Medical advice that can be lethal if followed?

      • SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Don’t forget revenge porn, which was already illegal but gets Republicans really mad when it’s of Hunter Biden but also taken down.

        • jasory@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not “revenge porn” if the images have already been leaked. Just like it’s not espionage to report on information already leaked.

          • GiveMemes@jlai.lu
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Is that true with revenge porn? Because with, for example, child porn, it’s not like they’re only going after the people making it but also the people distributing it.

            Another, more analogous example: Most of those old celebrity leaks (fappening) are illegal content to host/distribute, which is why sites wouldn’t/couldn’t allow it even if it would drive up user traffic. (Afaik)

        • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You can say the same thing about any government power. Or about government just existing. Or about human beings just existing.

          Denying people the opportunity to act in bad faith isn’t a strategy, not even a bad one.

    • JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is of course the problem with regulations on free speech. Any measures designed with the best of intentions are inevitably abused by future leaders. People need to imagine what Trump would do with this power.

      • TunaLobster@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Disagrees with whatever administration is in office. You can’t be short sighted with SCOTUS decisions. The Justices aren’t.