Matt Taibbi

Rank 28 of 47

Score 4

Do you know why they don’t just do that now? Because the U.S. government is so roundly mistrusted that it wouldn’t help. They’re essentially saying they need to censor because they’ve lost public trust. Their fault, not ours

9/5/2024, 6:31:57 PM

In reply to:

Matt Taibbi

@mtaibbi

504d

For the ten billionth time, there is no “absolute” free speech (libel, incitement, etc.). Second, the U.S. system is built on the premise that adults discern truth themselves. If the state wants a role, let it do what it did in the Soviet days — publish convincing rebuttals.

EyeRoller

@MaximumK75753

504d

@mtaibbi Instead of choosing to believe what you want, why not honestly confront the issue that a foreign country may create "fake news" that looks real to sow rancor and controversy here. How does that fit in your absolute free speech paradigm?

The statement in question addresses a public issue, specifically the trustworthiness of the U.S. government and its role in censorship, which constitutes public discourse. The tone is critical and accusatory, suggesting that the government’s need to censor is a result of its own loss of public trust.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement does not directly cause harm but is critical of the government, which is a public entity and not an individual. It does not violate this principle.
Principle 2:
I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. It criticizes a public institution rather than individuals, thus respecting privacy and dignity.
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. It is accusatory and does not seek to foster a constructive dialogue. [-1]
Principle 4:
I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
The statement does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It focuses on the actions and trustworthiness of the government rather than attacking individuals. [+1]
Principle 7:
I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
The statement upholds the principle of free speech by expressing a critical opinion about the government. It uses the platform responsibly to address a public concern. [+1]