Disinformation Governance Board = Ministry of Truth?

These just doesn’t seen like a good place for the federal government to be going. I’m not sure how it doesn’t become Orwellian. It’s bad enough when the IRS, FBI and other federal agencies get weaponized against political opponents, this just seems like another agency that might start out with “good intentions” that will eventually fall into the hands of nefarious politicians.

I tried to pick a link from a non-conservative leaning media source. It seems to think that the only critics of the board are conservative (and there are plenty of them) but it fails to mention that there are also democratic critics.

Feel free to discuss today on the GoA, while the topic is still not banned as disinformation…

2 Likes

When the GOP returns to power, it will become the “Ministry of Truth.”
Until then, no worries.

2 Likes

That article is so devoid of facts, besides uncritically quoting a bunch of republicans, that it’s hard for me to learn anything from it.

1 Like

Tweets as news.

There’s slightly more here, but I think at this point there isn’t much to know.

I agree with you. But I figured if I put a link which had facts (which right away means a non-liberal media source), fellow posters wouldn’t click on it. So I was left with a no-win situation. Feel free to google and find another media source to read.

Yeah, I think our self-brainwashing is a massive problem. But the federal government seems uniquely unequipped to solve it. I mean, isn’t this basically a rebuke to Trump, the previous head of the federal government?

Interpret the motivation however you want. I really don’t care. It really doesn’t matter. The “Ministry of Truth” should scare the hell out of you.

1 Like

No need to give it a new name when it already has a terrible name.

2 Likes

As opposed to the Administration of Lies we had fromm2016-2020?

3 Likes

Again, interpret the motivation however you wish. If it makes you feel better to throw mud at Trump, go for it. But that shouldn’t be a basis to completely reject this new board.

Trump certainly told plenty of lies.
Obama weaponized the IRS and FBI.
Nixon weaponized the IRS.

Regardless, this new board should scare the hell out of you. The federal government has no place in determining “disinformation”.

2 Likes

Under obama, a federal task force looked at the challenges creared by “big data”, and came up with a pretty good report.

If this is similar, then it does not scare me. We pretty clearly have a new societal challenge where technology is amplifying misinformation. Trump’s use of this in his coup attempt shows that it can threaten democracy itself. But all the nonsense about vaccines and masks on twitter and other places shows also that it can endanger peoples health and lives in less dramatic ways.

I think studying this in a more systematic way can be the first steps to creating policy to address it. There seems to be some bipartisan support for this, and i presume some policy changes would have to involve legislation.

1 Like

I mentioned the motivation in because it is self-defeating. This was created because we were brainwashed into attacking our own leaders. The problem is that the lead-brainwasher was also the leader of the federal government. So it doesn’t make sense for the feds to police truth when the fed leader is also the greatest threat.

Anyway, I’m not going to get “scared” until I see some details.

1 Like

I suppose it depends on what they do. Would you be opposed to our intelligence agencies observing social media and investigating whether accounts originating disruptive content are foreign-based?

2 Likes

Imagine, for a second, that a political opponent could also be an actual criminal. Now what do we do?

This is a bad idea that will just feed into the latest conspiracy theory. There is a problem for sure, but this isn’t going to help.

1 Like

That sounds nice in theory, only investigating accounts that are foreign based, but FISA/FISC warrants have been abused plenty of times. History doesn’t paint a happy future.

Well it isn’t like they are investigating a crime. More like doing research. So maybe not seeking proof that would hold up in court, but strategic research.

Remember when a state government passed legislation retaliating against a company that dared simply disagree with legislation?

Right now this seems like more pearl clutching.

3 Likes

Remember when a President withheld aid to a county unless they would dig up dirt on his political opponent?

I’m sure they didn’t need it…