• It'sbetterwithbutter@lemmus.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 days ago

    Thankfully I’m not an american and don’t have that problem, I mean you could hold a national referendum, a vote for transparency? I mean adverts for medication have disclaimers, America is known universally for it’s litigation and hence masses of discliamers, can’t obviously fake news be treated that way, a disclaimer that this article, clip etc is opion based and NOT factual? I’m not too well versed on the constitution, but it seems to be bandied about a lot (especially the 2nd amendment, which isn’t even followed as I believe it mentions well organised militias or so). I feel like the entire US political system needs an overhaul, and yes I know it’s an easy thing to say, but near impossible to do with such a divided population.

    • Hathaway@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      12 days ago

      I literally said you could display a banner that discloses that it’s a deepfake, that was my actual solution, rather than banning the medium of speech outright.

      We do need an overhaul.

      This individual lawsuit, though, isn’t all that unjust because Elon’s name is attached to it. You shouldn’t be able to ban a vehicle of speech because you don’t agree with it. Fuck, I don’t agree with it, and actually was equally grossed out about the lawsuit, until I did some digging on what 1st amendment lawyers were saying about it. Just because I don’t like it, doesn’t mean it should be banned.

      I agree with the overall sentiment of what you’re conveying about the country, in my opinion though, this lawsuit, isn’t a super effective way to voice those concerns. We do need overhaul, shit is broken. However, my state telling me what I can and cannot say, and how, is not okay with me. I hate Elon, unfortunately, a broken clock is right twice a day, even if he has ulterior motives, there are more effective ways to have change and not infringe on people’s rights.

      I never mentioned the 2nd amendment.

      I’ve actually thought about how to enact change with politics the way they are, and I’m not sure it happens, people in power have too much to lose. Really sad state of the US.

      • It'sbetterwithbutter@lemmus.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        12 days ago

        I meantioned the 2nd simply because it’s something that I see constantly being challenged online as to what it actually means, and how people seem to pick and choose parts of an amendment. As for the free speech, well at the end of the day it’s up to you to collectively decide where free speech ends and hate and violent incitment begins. The Europeans have their versions of that, obviously that’s suited to them, but obviously America is a different kettle of fish.