https://reason.com/2024/10/03/judge-stops-california-law-targeting-election-misinformation/

 

Those who support Kamala Harris obviously will support laws limiting speech. Democrats are for censorship, and every member of their party should be voted out.

14 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Actions speak louder than words. Stop being blind.

 

Tell me what allegations of government censorship arose during the Trump admin.?

You should get out of your right-wing bubble once-in-a-while.

 

https://firstamendmentwatch.org/deep-dive/are-media-blackouts-the-new-norm/

 

https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/attacks-on-science/trump-administration-censored-information-climate-change

 

https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/29/21273191/trump-twitter-social-media-censorship-executive-order-analysis-bias

 

https://www.wgbh.org/news/commentary/2020-07-29/how-trumps-efforts-to-ban-critical-books-violate-the-constitution

33 minutes ago, Mazungu said:

You should get out of your right-wing bubble once-in-a-while.

 

https://firstamendmentwatch.org/deep-dive/are-media-blackouts-the-new-norm/

 

https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/attacks-on-science/trump-administration-censored-information-climate-change

 

https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/29/21273191/trump-twitter-social-media-censorship-executive-order-analysis-bias

 

https://www.wgbh.org/news/commentary/2020-07-29/how-trumps-efforts-to-ban-critical-books-violate-the-constitution

Wow you are blinder than I thought. 

1 hour ago, Yagoda said:

Actions speak louder than words. Stop being blind.

 

Tell me what allegations of government censorship arose during the Trump admin.?

My apologies if these sources aren't from FOX.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/10/trump-wants-to-censor-the-press/542142/

 

https://www.npr.org/2024/07/08/nx-s1-4916564/trump-science-censorship-fears

 

https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/05/29/us-trump-attacks-social-media-platforms?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjwpP63BhDYARIsAOQkATaO6wFM6MoBMjv4filL27uVlO1UrxG2AvhprA5XUnl0s_WdI35AWY4aAmgNEALw_wcB

 

https://www.edf.org/how-we-stopped-trumps-epa-censoring-science

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8793038/

9 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

where are the fact checkers when it's a democrat lie??

total exaggeration on the ABC license, he was referring to them being dishonest and  they should have their license taken away for that. at no point did he say HE would take it away
you can listen to it here, first 20 seconds.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-abc-debate-license-harris-b2611073.html

You're splitting hairs Frank. 

Posts using derogatory and toxic nicknames or intentional misspelling of people’s names will be removed. If you don’t want your post to be removed, spell people’s names correctly, this applies to both sides of the political debate. 

36 minutes ago, Mazungu said:

You're splitting hairs Frank. 

no, i am not, you repeated a lie from the msm, i gave you a link proving that

the original comments seem to have been removed for some reason, so now i cannot quote what you said. 

 

but basically you said trump was going to take away their license (ABC), which was untrue. trump said they SHOULD have their license taken away for being dishonest. 

5 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

no, i am not, you repeated a lie from the msm, i gave you a link proving that

the original comments seem to have been removed for some reason, so now i cannot quote what you said. 

 

but basically you said trump was going to take away their license (ABC), which was untrue. trump said they SHOULD have their license taken away for being dishonest. 

It is not a lie to say Trump wants ABC to lose their license. 

 

Trump claimed the debate was "rigged" because the ABC News moderators fact checked several comments he made.

"They ought to take away their license for the way they did that," Trump told Fox News.

 

https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/fcc-chair-rejects-trump-call-pull-abc-licenses-over-presidential-debate-2024-09-19/

1 minute ago, Mazungu said:

It is not a lie to say Trump wants ABC to lose their license. 

 

Trump claimed the debate was "rigged" because the ABC News moderators fact checked several comments he made.

"They ought to take away their license for the way they did that," Trump told Fox News.

 

https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/fcc-chair-rejects-trump-call-pull-abc-licenses-over-presidential-debate-2024-09-19/

yes, in the context of they behaved dishonestly. he did not say he would he would take it away which is how your comment was worded.

1 hour ago, Mazungu said:

My apologies if these sources aren't from FOX.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/10/trump-wants-to-censor-the-press/542142/

 

https://www.npr.org/2024/07/08/nx-s1-4916564/trump-science-censorship-fears

 

https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/05/29/us-trump-attacks-social-media-platforms?gad_source=1&gclid=Cj0KCQjwpP63BhDYARIsAOQkATaO6wFM6MoBMjv4filL27uVlO1UrxG2AvhprA5XUnl0s_WdI35AWY4aAmgNEALw_wcB

 

https://www.edf.org/how-we-stopped-trumps-epa-censoring-science

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8793038/

so when John Kerry talks about changing the 1st amendment to censor media outlets thats ok, but when trumps says similar it's an attack on the press?  do you really not see the hypocrisy in the media coverage?

Just now, frank83628 said:

so when John Kerry talks about changing the 1st amendment to censor media outlets thats ok, but when trumps says similar it's an attack on the press?  do you really not see the hypocrisy in the media coverage?

No they don't. It's orwellian.

15 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

yes, in the context of they behaved dishonestly. he did not say he would he would take it away which is how your comment was worded.

If dishonesty is your standard you have no shame then in supporting Trump. 

5 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

so when John Kerry talks about changing the 1st amendment to censor media outlets thats ok, but when trumps says similar it's an attack on the press?  do you really not see the hypocrisy in the media coverage?

Please post the link for John Kerry wanting to change the 1st amendment to censor the media. 

A post and all replies to it, that has shortened another poster’s quote, to therefore change the meaning have been removed.

Of course the Trump and Co. folks in the world don't want state laws that aim to prevent election-related misinformation, because the Trump campaign and its right-wing surrogates have been an unceasing flood of misinformation and false or misleading claims this year.

 

Examples:

 

Fact check: To attack Harris, Trump falsely describes new stats on immigrants and homicide

https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/29/politics/fact-check-trump-harris-immigrants-homicide/index.html

 

Fact check: New Trump attack ad deceptively edits out key words from Harris and The New York Times

https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/04/politics/fact-check-trump-ad-harris-taxes/index.html

 

Trump Ad on Taxes Uses Deceptive Political Playbook

https://www.factcheck.org/2024/10/trump-ad-on-taxes-uses-deceptive-political-playbook/

 

Trump repeats baseless claim about Haitian immigrants eating pets

https://archive.is/g1XUn

 

etc etc etc...

 

Re the California law:

 

"The law makes it illegal to create and publish false materials related to elections 120 days before Election Day and 60 days thereafter. It also allows courts to stop the distribution of the materials, and violators could face civil penalties. The law exempts parody and satire."

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/california-election-ai-deepfakes-law-potential-legal-challenges/

 

As reported below, it's a perplexing ruling that appears to give permission for all kinds of election-related misinformation to be conveyed via video format.

 

But the court still ruled for some reason:

 

"Mendez ruled that one aspect of the law did pass muster: If content is audio only, a disclosure must be read at the start and end of the recording, and at two-minute intervals if the recording is longer than two minutes.

 

“The court acknowledges that the risks posed by artificial intelligence and deepfakes are significant, especially as civic engagement migrates online and disinformation proliferates on social media,” Mendez wrote."

 

https://www.courthousenews.com/federal-judge-stops-implementation-of-california-misinformation-law/

 

The above news report doesn't give any explanation of how/why the judge decided that election-related digitally manipulated (faked) video content shouldn't have the same kinds of disclosure safeguards.

 

 

Edited October 5, 20241 yr by TallGuyJohninBKK

1 minute ago, Mazungu said:

Please post the link for John Kerry wanting to change the 1st amendment to censor the media. 

media sources not approved by the Dems or establishment is labelled misinformation, when the dem backing msm is allowed freedome to post anything

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/john-kerry-first-amendment-major-block-stopping-disinformation

1 minute ago, frank83628 said:

media sources not approved by the Dems or establishment is labelled misinformation,

Yes we have seen that over the last 4 years debacle  and it sadly continues...luckily many are waking from the "MSM"  programming and questioning the "narrative"

14 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

so when John Kerry talks about changing the 1st amendment to censor media outlets thats ok, but when trumps says similar it's an attack on the press?  do you really not see the hypocrisy in the media coverage?

John Kerry was stating a truth. What's your problem with what he said? Do you have a problem with facts?

 

“You know, there’s a lot of discussion now about how you curb those entities in order to guarantee that you’re going to have some accountability on facts, etcetera,” he said. “But look, if people only go to one source, and the source they go to is sick, and, you know, has an agenda, and they’re putting out disinformation, our First Amendment stands as a major block to be able to just, you know, hammer it out of existence.”

9 minutes ago, Mazungu said:

John Kerry was stating a truth. What's your problem with what he said? Do you have a problem with facts?

 

“You know, there’s a lot of discussion now about how you curb those entities in order to guarantee that you’re going to have some accountability on facts, etcetera,” he said. “But look, if people only go to one source, and the source they go to is sick, and, you know, has an agenda, and they’re putting out disinformation, our First Amendment stands as a major block to be able to just, you know, hammer it out of existence.”

so you are pro censorship then? 

 

you just posted 'misinformation' regarding something Trumps didn't say, should you be removed from the internet now? 

Edited October 5, 20241 yr by frank83628

Just now, frank83628 said:

so you are pro censorship then? 

 

you just posted 'misinformation' regarding something Trumps didn't say, should you be removed from the internet now? 

Please tell me where I posted misinformation. 

Just now, Mazungu said:

Please tell me where I posted misinformation. 

you wrote that trump wanted to take ABC's license away, thats was NOT true, thats misinformation. 

 

The California law in question, which sounds pretty reasonable and valuable to me:

AB 2839 - Protecting Democracy against Election Disinformation and Deepfakes

"California is entering its first-ever generative artificial intelligence (AI) election, in which disinformation powered by generative AI will pollute our information ecosystems like never before. In a few clicks, using current technology, bad actors now have the power to create a false image of a candidate accepting a bribe, a fake video of an elections official “caught on tape” saying that voting machines are not secure, or generate an artificial robocall in the Governor's voice incorrectly telling millions of Californians their voting site has changed."

 

PROBLEM
Those trying to influence campaigns—conspiracy theorists, foreign states, online trolls, and even candidates themselves—are already creating and distributing deepfake images, audio, and video content, in the US and around the world.

 

This generative AI-fueled disinformation can affect voter behavior and undermine faith in our elections. With this expected onslaught already starting, voters in 2024 will not know what images, audio, or video they can trust, and their faith in election integrity and our democracy will be significantly diminished.

---

 

https://a28.asmdc.org/ab-2839-protecting-democracy-against-election-disinformation-and-deepfakes

 

 

Edited October 5, 20241 yr by TallGuyJohninBKK

2 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

you wrote that trump wanted to take ABC's license away, thats was NOT true, thats misinformation. 

 

You must love splitting hairs Frank. I said show me and you're only telling me what I said. And in your post of John Kerry he did not say he was in favor of censorship. So you are spreading misinformation. Below is the quote from Kerry. Where does he say he's in favor of censorship?

 

“You know, there’s a lot of discussion now about how you curb those entities in order to guarantee that you’re going to have some accountability on facts, etcetera,” he said. “But look, if people only go to one source, and the source they go to is sick, and, you know, has an agenda, and they’re putting out disinformation, our First Amendment stands as a major block to be able to just, you know, hammer it out of existence.”

5 hours ago, Yagoda said:

https://reason.com/2024/10/03/judge-stops-california-law-targeting-election-misinformation/

 

Those who support Kamala Harris obviously will support laws limiting speech. Democrats are for censorship, and every member of their party should be voted out.

There is a reason for that. They ran out of soap to clean Trumps mouth.

Edited October 5, 20241 yr by Gottfrid

Just now, Gottfrid said:

There is a reason for that. They ran out of soap to clan Trumps mouth.

How typically childish of you. You made a typo by the way

What the above posts don't make clear is the one law that was the subject of this court ruling was only one of THREE related laws recently signed by the governor in California. And this court ruling only applies to one of those, AB 2839.

 

The other two remain in effect, though apparently won't apply for the upcoming November election because they weren't "urgency" measures:

 

"AB 2655 by Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park) requires large online platforms to remove or label deceptive and digitally altered or created content related to elections during specified periods, and requires them to provide mechanisms to report such content. It also authorizes candidates, elected officials, elections officials, the Attorney General, and a district attorney or city attorney to seek injunctive relief against a large online platform for noncompliance with the act."

 

AND

 

AB 2355 by Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo (D-Los Angeles) requires that electoral advertisements using AI-generated or substantially altered content feature a disclosure that the material has been altered. The bill authorizes the Fair Political Practices Commission to enforce a violation of these disclosure requirements by seeking injunctive relief to compel compliance or pursuing other remedies available to the commission under the Political Reform Act. 

 

https://www.gov.ca.gov/2024/09/17/governor-newsom-signs-bills-to-combat-deepfake-election-content/

 

 

1 minute ago, Mazungu said:

our First Amendment stands as a major block to be able to just, you know, hammer it out of existence.”

There is his favour of censorship right there in plain sight   of course those on favour of censorship and brain washed think he's an advocate of free speech

43 minutes ago, Mazungu said:

If dishonesty is your standard you have no shame then in supporting Trump. 

 

Lose another point for deflection.

And the reason for this kind of legislation aiming to combat so-called deepfake content is the example of what happened earlier this year in New Hampshire:

 

Telecom company that sent Biden ‘deepfake’ calls to NH voters hit with fine

August 21, 2024

 

The telecom company that delivered robocalls mimicking President Joe Biden’s voice to New Hampshire voters two days before the state’s presidential primary is being ordered to pay $1 million to the Federal Communications Commission.

 

Under the terms of the settlement announced Wednesday, Texas-based Lingo Telecom will also revise its business practices. In January, the company delivered tens of thousands of robocalls to New Hampshire voters that included an artificially created voice that mimicked Biden. The message used the Biden catchphrase, “What a bunch of malarkey,” before encouraging recipients to skip the state primary and save their votes for November.

...

Steven Kramer, the political consultant accused of coordinating the calls, is facing multiple charges of voter suppression in New Hampshire, as well as potential civil fines from the FCC, for his role in the misinformation effort.

 

https://www.nhpr.org/nh-news/2024-08-21/telecom-company-that-sent-biden-deepfake-calls-to-nh-voters-hit-with-fine

 

Edited October 5, 20241 yr by TallGuyJohninBKK

2 minutes ago, johng said:

There is his favour of censorship right there in plain sight   of course those on favour of censorship and brain washed think he's an advocate of free speech

He did not say he was in favor of censorship. He was stating a fact that the first amendment is a major block to fighting misinformation. For instance people's health would be harmed if misinformation like this is allowed. 

 

"I see the disinfectant that knocks it out in a minute, one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning? As you see, it gets in the lungs, it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it would be interesting to check that."