I would not call libertarians people with morals and standards. Sure, having no morals can help get your goals but I'm not talking about that. We should have morals and consider some people vurneability to being subverted. Why do you think breivik isn't allowed to speak to anyone? Some people are snakes, very likeable, charismatic and convincing
They shouldn't be censored, but they should definitely not be classified as a news outlet. If classified as news, then report stories backed by research and facts. What MSM does is deliver stories that are opinions, e.g. Trump thinks this, Trump wants to do that. MSM need to be held to actual classic reporting standards. If you can't produce facts to support a story then label it as an editorial, not news. This will never happen though. All the MSM has is conjecture and hyperbole.
Of course. There is a difference between communist censoring to gain power and hide lies, and between preventative removing of harmful opportunities.
If there was no alcohol, there wouldnt be tragedies caused by it. Prohibition didn't work out in USA, but in Europe there is no way to buy a weapon illegally and anonymously. There is difference between banning drugs/prostitution/harmful content and truth. But USA do not really care about enforcing the former, while is worryingly succesful at the latter
this is why censoring does not mean proving person censored was not wrong. Cnn among others should be censored
lmao with that libertarian attitude good luck doing anything in america
some books need to be burned
Its called having actual morals and standards. Its the downside to such.
I would not call libertarians people with morals and standards. Sure, having no morals can help get your goals but I'm not talking about that. We should have morals and consider some people vurneability to being subverted. Why do you think breivik isn't allowed to speak to anyone? Some people are snakes, very likeable, charismatic and convincing
They shouldn't be censored, but they should definitely not be classified as a news outlet. If classified as news, then report stories backed by research and facts. What MSM does is deliver stories that are opinions, e.g. Trump thinks this, Trump wants to do that. MSM need to be held to actual classic reporting standards. If you can't produce facts to support a story then label it as an editorial, not news. This will never happen though. All the MSM has is conjecture and hyperbole.
good point. Still I think You underestimate big media ability to subvert, people reading text labeled as editorial still can be convinced by evil
I absolutely agree, but you can't outright censor without becoming the very thing we despise. It's a double edged sword for certain.
Of course. There is a difference between communist censoring to gain power and hide lies, and between preventative removing of harmful opportunities.
If there was no alcohol, there wouldnt be tragedies caused by it. Prohibition didn't work out in USA, but in Europe there is no way to buy a weapon illegally and anonymously. There is difference between banning drugs/prostitution/harmful content and truth. But USA do not really care about enforcing the former, while is worryingly succesful at the latter