Liberals to Create New Regulations for Social Media Platforms

[Dougie93]

10 hours ago, jacee said:

Breach of the peace applies only  to "Public incitement of hatred". 

But not to "Wilful promotion of hatred" which covers online, print, flyers, posters and other communications. 

In this case those communications are by American companies on American servers in America, so Canadian law doesn't apply.

[OftenWrong]

On 12/14/2019 at 1:47 PM, scribblet said:

"Create new regulations for social media platforms, starting with a requirement that all platforms remove illegal content, including hate speech, within 24 hours or face significant penalties."

Does this mean our moderator is a government chivato now?

[jacee]

21 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

In this case those communications are by American companies on American servers in America, so Canadian law doesn't apply.

Ya, that's a big complication not addressed in the letter. Lol 

Remains to be seen how it's addressed in the policy/regulations. 

Edited December 18, 2019 by jacee

[Argus]

So apparently Germany is going to hire 600 more intelligence agents to go after Neo Nazis. Neo Nazis are a growing problem in Germany, growing and getting more violent.

Here's the thing. Germany has had very strict laws against Nazi content on the internet for decades. Pro Nazi pamphlets, books, music - anything related to it has been banned from the public sphere for longer than I've been alive. Holocaust denial is a crime. Wearing a Swastika or any other item of Nazi regalia or giving a Nazi salute are all crimes.

And it hasn't accomplished a goddam thing. The resurgence in the far right in Germany, just as it is elsewhere throughout Europe, is directly related to government policy - mainly immigration policy. And banning all nasty messages hasn't done anything to stop it.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/g5xpdj/germany-is-hiring-600-police-and-intelligence-agents-to-hunt-down-neo-nazis?utm_source=reddit.com

Edited December 18, 2019 by Argus

[Moonlight Graham]

On 12/16/2019 at 7:23 PM, Michael Hardner said:

1. Ok - let's go back to your main question: "Are you one of those people that thinks the government should decide which ideas are good or bad instead of public opinion? "
    Why is not the same as banning cigarettes ?  If we tried something and decided that there's no good in it... why not ban it ? 

There's a constitutional right to free speech, there's no constitutional right to smoke cigarettes in a confined space with other people.  Cigarette smoke harms the physical bodies of other people, it breaches the security of the person (life, liberty, security of the person....we're balancing those 3 things in our laws much of the time).  Is the right to security of the person being breached enough where we need to limit the rights of liberty?

On 12/16/2019 at 7:23 PM, Michael Hardner said:

Let's p;lay devil's advocate here.  I'm not talking about person freedom of speech I'm talking about speech through "media" which is already heavily regulated in what you can/can't say and always has been.  Is there some benefit to someone starting a TV station that broadcasts Holocaust Denial ?  I am not a fan of government getting involved in this, but as a last resort at least it seems like an option.

IMO if you broadcast holocaust denial on a TV station who cares?  The free market will take care of it.  Rogers or Bell or Netflix aren't going to carry the channel because customers will complain and cancel subscriptions and the channel will be removed by the TV providers.  I can't think of any TV stations even broadcasting holocaust denial probably for this reason.  Any media personality would be fired because sponsors would drop out etc.

Milo was banned from twitter for harassment.  Alex Jones was banned from Youtube, Facebook, Apple, Spotify.

On 12/16/2019 at 7:23 PM, Michael Hardner said:

9. The RCMP checks on what Immams say in sermons...   And that's in-person real free speech, not even online.

Because some of them are jerks preaching death to Jews and preaching jihad, which is threat of violence.  Some of them need to be watched.  The state/RCMP doesn't intervene and ban speech (liberty) unless it's violent and threatens or incites violence aka threatens to breach security of the person.

What I want to know Mike is what specifically do you want regulated by government?  Mostly what is hear from you is well we have a problem in media and we need to fix it.  What are specific examples of harm happening in media/social media that you think the government should step in and stop?

[Michael Hardner]

17 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

What I want to know Mike is what specifically do you want regulated by government?  Mostly what is hear from you is well we have a problem in media and we need to fix it.  What are specific examples of harm happening in media/social media that you think the government should step in and stop?

I don't want government to be the solver but I don't see answers coming from elsewhere.

And your answers are just rote recitations from civics class, without imagination ... Even the slight imagination to see where the system is evolving to.

Russian intelligence agencies funding fake Facebook personas to inflame people and sow disunity is free speech.  Bell and Rogers and Twitter shutting down ideas is not censorship.

You need to imagine that you are looking back at the past fifty years from now.

[OftenWrong]

What we could do to make it even better is put on more limits. Restrict not just hate speech, but anything that is subversive!

Schlachthaus funf!

[Moonlight Graham]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I don't want government to be the solver but I don't see answers coming from elsewhere.

And your answers are just rote recitations from civics class, without imagination ... Even the slight imagination to see where the system is evolving to.

This is too vague, I can't respond to it.

If there's a lack of imagination here, it's you, because you keep saying we have a problem we need to fix but you've failed to come up with specific or workable proposals to fix them.  How do you want the gov to fix Russian troll bots?

Quote

Russian intelligence agencies funding fake Facebook personas to inflame people and sow disunity is free speech.

But now you're talking about foreign interference, that's a different issue.  Foreign governments shouldn't be allowed to do whatever they want in our democracy and people especially government agents in foreign countries aren't protected by the Charter.

Quote

Bell and Rogers and Twitter shutting down ideas is not censorship.

Of course it is.

Edited December 20, 2019 by Moonlight Graham

[Michael Hardner]

4 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

1) ... you've failed to come up with specific or workable proposals to fix them. 

2) How do you want the gov to fix Russian troll bots?

3) But now you're talking about foreign interference, that's a different issue.   

4) Of course it is.

1) Well, I'm suggesting collective action is all.  Really the workable proposal would be if people did the actual shouting down that you gesture to.

2) That's the most fixable of all of these.  

3) Do you know how they do this ?  They have fake personas ... those personas squawk about freedom of speech also.

4) Ok then... " Rogers or Bell or Netflix aren't going to carry the channel " isn't censorship ?  What ?

 

 

[taxme]

On 12/14/2019 at 2:34 PM, Michael Hardner said:

So you want to ensure ISIS has it's rights protected ?  Well, you are indeed a beacon of freedom then.

I honestly don't give a lark about this, except if it makes trolls cry I will be delighted.  Liars have already said that I want to ban ideas I don't *like* so why the hell not ?  You free speech folks blew it with me when you were irresponsible about speaking up about bad speech: you see that's part of the deal of free speech, the bad speech is supposed to be called out.

You had a nice toy and you didn't play right with it, or rather you gave it to Russian kids to play with and they weaponized information while you did nothing.  You are to blame for this - and I don't mean your type I mean each one of you personally.  
 

In my new role as a lieutenant of the information police I'll be knocking on all your doors shortly !  

It's all about freedom of speech by conservatives like me which your dear leader Trudeau would like to suppress. That is what this is all about. We already have laws on the books that do the same thing that your dear leader wants to incorporate. Canadians seem to get more new laws against freedom of speech every month these days. But you could careless about freedom of speech, eh? One day you may have the thought police come knocking at your door. Boy, would I love to be there. 

[OftenWrong]

On 12/14/2019 at 5:34 PM, Michael Hardner said:

I'll be knocking on all your doors shortly

At least wait until springtime, so you can go pound sand for awhile after.