I don't want to be too mean but I think progressives fall for the idea of "MiSinForMaTiOn And DiSinForMaTiOn eXpeRTs" because it sounds nice, it's emotionally attractive. The problem is, you don't have to be a deep thinker to understand the problem with this thinking: who defines what is true and what is not true? The obvious answer is: …
I don't want to be too mean but I think progressives fall for the idea of "MiSinForMaTiOn And DiSinForMaTiOn eXpeRTs" because it sounds nice, it's emotionally attractive. The problem is, you don't have to be a deep thinker to understand the problem with this thinking: who defines what is true and what is not true? The obvious answer is: those with power and influence.
We see this displayed in a really scary way with Tim Walz claiming that "misinformation and hate speech" aren't protected by the First Amendment. Of course, misinformation and hate speech are protected speech in the US, for a logical and important reason: what are misinformation and hate speech 🤷? I often say that "hate speech" doesn't exist, for all intents and purposes, because it cannot be defined, even in a general way. Everyone considers different ideas and speech to be "hateful."
There are two types of people who want misinformation, disinformation, and hate speech "experts" to be empowered with the ability to censor fellow citizens: those who understand this power and wish to use it, and those who think that "fighting misinformation, disinformation, and hate speech" is a noble goal and can be done fairly and safely. The latter is arguably more dangerous because good intentions of voters can help authoritarians wield tremendous power.
The other side of the problem is that there are some very heavily moneyed interests funding most of the outfits in the mis/dis/mal-information space. It has quickly become something of a cottage industry since 2017. Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger have done some good reporting on tracing the money and the influence networks behind what they termed the "Censorship Industrial Complex." Following the money and then looking at their hiring pipelines gets really interesting, especially when you start looking not just in the US but at all of these groups across the western world. Lots of shell companies and "former intelligence" on staff.
What I realized after digging deep into the subject is that the modern left's obsession with misinformation, disinformation, and "malinformation" is that those emotionally attractive sentiments were laundered into the public discourse by influential people and institutions as a necessary step in the expansion of this project.
I don't want to be too mean but I think progressives fall for the idea of "MiSinForMaTiOn And DiSinForMaTiOn eXpeRTs" because it sounds nice, it's emotionally attractive. The problem is, you don't have to be a deep thinker to understand the problem with this thinking: who defines what is true and what is not true? The obvious answer is: those with power and influence.
We see this displayed in a really scary way with Tim Walz claiming that "misinformation and hate speech" aren't protected by the First Amendment. Of course, misinformation and hate speech are protected speech in the US, for a logical and important reason: what are misinformation and hate speech 🤷? I often say that "hate speech" doesn't exist, for all intents and purposes, because it cannot be defined, even in a general way. Everyone considers different ideas and speech to be "hateful."
There are two types of people who want misinformation, disinformation, and hate speech "experts" to be empowered with the ability to censor fellow citizens: those who understand this power and wish to use it, and those who think that "fighting misinformation, disinformation, and hate speech" is a noble goal and can be done fairly and safely. The latter is arguably more dangerous because good intentions of voters can help authoritarians wield tremendous power.
See, for example, the Klan march in Skokie. (What would the ACLU do today?)
The other side of the problem is that there are some very heavily moneyed interests funding most of the outfits in the mis/dis/mal-information space. It has quickly become something of a cottage industry since 2017. Matt Taibbi and Michael Shellenberger have done some good reporting on tracing the money and the influence networks behind what they termed the "Censorship Industrial Complex." Following the money and then looking at their hiring pipelines gets really interesting, especially when you start looking not just in the US but at all of these groups across the western world. Lots of shell companies and "former intelligence" on staff.
What I realized after digging deep into the subject is that the modern left's obsession with misinformation, disinformation, and "malinformation" is that those emotionally attractive sentiments were laundered into the public discourse by influential people and institutions as a necessary step in the expansion of this project.