POLL: Is Censorship a Partisan Issue?
https:// www.realclearpolitics.com /real_clear_opinion_research/poll_is_censorship_a_partisan_issue_149790.html POLL: Is Censorship a Partisan Issue?
Republican voters (74%) and independents (61%) believe speech should be legal “under any circumstances, while Democrats are almost evenly divided. A bare majority of Democrats (53%) say speech should be legal under any circumstances, while 47% say it should be legal “only under certain circumstances.”
Any circumstances? What about a public school teacher explaining homosexuality to their students?
12Speech within the bounds of employment typically wouldn't be considered censorship since you're under a voluntary agreement to say specific things. For an extreme example, if a teacher just sat around talking about their failed marriage and gambling issues, few would consider it censorship since it obviously isn't within the scope of their employment. They're free to talk about it all they wish, they just can't get paid to do it in the classroom
-1Yes, but not specifically about public school teachers. "Democrats are significantly more likely than Republicans to favor stifling the free speech rights of political extremists. Also, Republicans don’t vary by the group: Only about half of GOP voters favor censorship — whether asked about the Ku Klux Klan, Nazis, or the Communist Party."
-4
This is me:
- Liberals are convinced of the presence of a “fact gap” in the current political environment, which is to say that liberals’ desire to clamp down on misinformation stems from a certainty that conservative content is, objectively speaking, less factual than liberal media content.
Network Propaganda demonstrated this quite convincingly. Unlike other media ecosystems, the right-wing media ecosystem sources their content from the fringes and brings it to the mainstream. Like, nothing from Dissent Magazine isn't going to show up in the New York Times. But stuff from Breitbart and...wtfever counts as fringe on the right, showed up on Fox News, often disseminated via Tucker Carlson.
That whole process demonstrates a lack of journalistic integrity on the right to me (or, to be fair to Tucker Carlson as a former Fox News host, a completely different idea of journalistic integrity than is conventional). The entire right-wing media ecosystem seems to not care for facts or anything that is real from what I've seen. Everything is used to frame events for some political purpose, and it's not beyond them to manufacturer fake crises.
So, the solution seems like not allowing that disinformation. My real preferred solution is creating a whole society that cares about intellectual integrity. But we have people that say and believe CRT is taught to children, which is 100% false. So...ya know...something needs to be done.
11Network Propaganda demonstrated this quite convincingly
Yeah, to be honest, I'm not spending $15 and reading that book to make any definitive statements about the claims they make. Just to preface in case your response is going to be "the book covered that criticism already".
Unlike other media ecosystems, the right-wing media ecosystem sources their content from the fringes and brings it to the mainstream. Like, nothing from Dissent Magazine isn't going to show up in the New York Times. But stuff from Breitbart and...wtfever counts as fringe on the right, showed up on Fox News, often disseminated via Tucker Carlson.
What's wrong with ideas being "sourced from the fringe"? Something isn't automatically wrong because it's "more extreme" or whatever, especially when it comes to subjective views. And while I'm not particularly a major consumer of mainstream garbage, I find that it's all just about the same, regardless of left or right, with the primary bias being in the ideological spin put on things, with a secondary focus on what does and doesn't get coverage. Fox is going to praise an anti-abortion bill, and the NYT will condemn it, for instance, where neither is right or wrong, they just have different points of view. Or fox is going to report Biden saying some mumbled garbage and tripping while CNN reports trump standing in the vacinity of a gun. Same shit. Both are biased, neither is right or wrong about it. Just different perspectives.
As a side note, I clicked on the "dissent magazine" link since I hadn't heard of it, and oh boy that's a weird site. Like, Wtf is this article "Know Your Enemy: Elon Musk, the Jews, and the ADL, with Mari Cohen, Alex Kane, and Peter Beinart". Some real "I'm playing both sides so I always come out on top" shit right there.
The entire right-wing media ecosystem seems to not care for facts or anything that is real from what I've seen. Everything is used to frame events for some political purpose, and it's not beyond them to manufacturer fake crises.
Buddy all the media does that. It's hardly a right-wing exclusive. If you have any specific examples of relevant right wing media being un-factual to a level above and beyond the general standard of mainstream media, feel free to provide them.
-5
Some findings:
-
Republican voters (74%) and independents (61%) believe speech should be legal “under any circumstances, while Democrats are almost evenly divided. A bare majority of Democrats (53%) say speech should be legal under any circumstances, while 47% say it should be legal “only under certain circumstances.”
-
Nearly one-third of Democratic voters (34%) say Americans have “too much freedom.” This compared to 14.6% of Republicans. Republicans were most likely to say Americans have too little freedom (46%), while only 22% of Democrats feel that way. Independents were in the middle in both categories.
-
Although majorities of Democrats, Republicans, and independents agree the news media should be able to report stories they believe are in the national interest, this consensus shifts when it comes to social media censorship. A majority of Democrats (52%) approve of the government censoring social media content under the rubric of protecting national security. Among Republicans and independents, this percentage is only one-third.
-
Poll respondents were read this statement: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” Only 31% of Democratic voters “strongly agreed” with that sentiment, compared to 51% of Republicans.
-
Fully three-fourths of Democrats believe government has a responsibility to limit “hateful” social media posts, while Republicans are more split, with 50% believing the government has a responsibility to restrict hateful posts. (Independents, once again, are in the middle.)
-
Democrats are significantly more likely than Republicans to favor stifling the free speech rights of political extremists. Also, Republicans don’t vary by the group: Only about half of GOP voters favor censorship — whether asked about the Ku Klux Klan, Nazis, or the Communist Party.
2-
Lefto-fascists are the greatest proponents of censorship.
-1I'm surprised that only half of liberals want the government to censor speech they don't like. I only seem to run into the extremists that want to ban and control everything.
-2Lemmy has a lot of left wing extremists, between lemmygrad, hexbear, and the devs themselves. Lemmy does not represent the average left winger.
-1
Politics is war by other means.
This is what you need to understand: these organizations seek power. All of them, even the Republican party. You want an environment where you can agree to disagree, where you sell your ideals and ideas to the people and they decide, that's not how any of this works. Your opponents know what the game is. If they win they plan on never letting you pitch your ideas to the public again. If you intend to value 1A, 2A, 4A then you should seek to dominate and destroy your opponents and then institute your ideals. If you intend to take freedom away I hope you fail along with them and that your movement crumbles and dies.
-3"...even the Republican party."
You say that like they're not the worst offender. They attempted a coup, and the majority of those corrupt pieces of garbage are still in their positions. They're about to shut down the government in an effort to derail Trump going to jail. The level of cognitive dissonance that your statement represents is impressive.
7you should seek to dominate and destroy your opponents and then institute your ideals.
The call is coming from inside the house
2