Shove enough meth into him to OD his brainless head
Isn’t that the guy that keeps exposing himself to children?
Yes, but only because the exotic phallus and scrotum piercings he has are designed to have a hypnotic effect. Then he grabs them while they’re dazed.
In his child-trafficking van with the Klan stickers on the back?
No, no. He’s in the child trafficking van with the kkk wrap. The really gaudy one. Can’t miss it.
Honestly I don’t know how he drives it with that huge swastika obscuring the windshield.
I can’t wait until the onion gets infowars
I hope they deep fake Alex Jones and accuse the other one of being the fake.
Misinformation laws can quickly get 1984-ish. In the US both political parties have different ideas on what’s true and what’s misinformation, I don’t really like the idea of criminalizing “misinformation” when the accepted narrative will change every 4-8 years.
Edit: Surprisingly, this is now one of my most downvoted comments ever on Lemmy. Do you guys really want the government deciding what you can or can’t say online?
I agree with the potential for Orwellian uses, and I agree with the need for SOME kind of repercussion for active misinformation peddling and manipulation of the masses. (As opposed to honest mistakes).
Like all things in this world, I feel topics like this are nuanced and the current need to make everything into a chalk/cheese divisive issue is counter productive. I feel we need mature people who can navigate that nuance without the need for forced polarisation of the topics.
I’ll also add some context for people outside of Australia:
The Onion / Shovel headline is cunning, as locals with knowledge will tell you the target of the the parody article (Peter Dutton) is a well known user of defamation suits to go after people who say things about him he feels are untrue.
Also worth noting that eventually, common sense and rationality prevailed:
“can get” implies there’s examples of like misinfo laws becoming orwellian. I cannot find such examples. Laws that penalize people for knowingly lying for profit, clout, etc tend to curb bombastic discourse. These standards are common in defamation suits. Extending them to more media makes sense.
What’s always orwellian is like anti terrorism laws where laws intended to curb oppositional rhetoric or groups become applied on large swaths of people.
The actual laws they prosecuted Assange for, for instance were anti espionage laws if I recall.
Obvious examples are countries like Russia, China, North Korea, etc. Russia specifically passed laws banning misinformation in 2020, and later fined google millions of dollars over it.
Sure, and this one probably wasn’t great but also the article shows why there’s of course a valuable line
Yeah. To me the misinformation conversation just sounds like”why are the poors talking to each other instead of listening to US?”
If we had a misinformation law in 2001, would it have applied to the news outlets or gov officials who were lying about the Iraq war?
There is A real problem in how we sort out second hand evidence, it’s just that this problem didn’t magically start when social media became a thing and it won’t be fixed by returning authority to those same old institutions who were lying to us in the past.
Maybe our entire society is sick in a way we can’t fix with laws? Or something?
This what they want…
Their real crimes to be drowned out by bullshit, so voters just write everything off as misinformation when it’s a Republican, but “proof” if it’s about a Dem.
Funny headline tho
This what they want…
Their real crimes to be drowned out by bullshit, so voters just write everything off as misinformation when it’s a Republican, but “proof” if it’s about a Dem.
Funny headline tho
Peter Dutton is neither a Republican nor a Democrat, he’s an Australian politician.
Funny comment tho
Eh. Same plot, different casting.
For someone that’s constantly in every US politics comments section talking shit, you don’t even know who is a US politician and who isn’t.
The loudest know the least, same as ever.
It’s okay to just admit you don’t know who Peter Dutton is and also don’t even know enough about US politics to realize who is and isn’t part of American political discourse.
To be fair though, Dutton and the Liberal party are pretty closely aligned politically with Republicans, they just have to tone it down to not scare off the more moderate voters.
I did…
But I don’t think any interaction we have is going to be productive
I did…
No, you didn’t.
But I don’t think any interaction we have is going to be productive
There’s something we can agree on. Bye bye now 👋
