Now Italy Wants To Make 'Fake News' Illegal
from the but-can-you-define-it? dept
Over and over again, we've talked about the ridiculousness of the moral panic around so-called "fake news" -- a broad and somewhat meaningless term now used to describe just about anything from actual made-up stories, to news articles that have a small factual error, to those with a "spin" that someone disagrees with. And, as we warned, the panic of "fake news" is leading to widespread calls for censorship. A few weeks ago, we wrote about how German officials were supporting a plan to criminalize "fake news" and now Italy wants to join in on the fun. In an interview with the country's antitrust chief, Giovanni Pitruzzella, he argued that it's really time to crack down on the internet, with government wielding the censorship power over whatever it calls "fake news."“Post-truth in politics is one of the drivers of populism and it is one of the threats to our democracies,” Pitruzzella said. “We have reached a fork in the road: we have to choose whether to leave the internet like it is, the wild west, or whether it needs rules that appreciate the way communication has changed. I think we need to set those rules and this is the role of the public sector.”Any time you hear of a plan for the government to be able to remove news stories or impose fines for reporting, you should get very, very worried. That is a recipe for censorship. Yes, blatantly made-up stories are a problem -- but not one that should be dealt with by expanding the tools of censorship in a way that will be abused. We need to teach better media literacy and get more people to understand how to read critically and to do research. Putting tools to censor and fine journalists in the hands of government will inevitably lead to that power being abused. Someone will report on something that makes a politician look bad, and suddenly it will be declared "fake news." We're seeing that happen already -- even without the threat of fines and censorship.
Pitruzzella argued tackling fake news should not be left up to social media companies, but instead be tackled by the state through independent authorities with the power to remove fake news and impose fines, coordinated by Brussels, similar to the way the EU regulates competition.
This focus on "fake news" is becoming increasingly dangerous and many of the people screaming loudest about it -- including lots of journalists -- don't seem to realize where it will end. You can worry about truly made-up stories all you want, but if you think the solution to it is to increase the powers to censor and stifle and chill expression, you're not going to be happy with how it boomerangs back on legitimate expression.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: censorship, fake news, fines, italy
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the velvet glove...
it will only ratchet to total oppression, it don't go the other way...
power never devolves voluntarily, now what to do ? ? ?
surely, voting for ______ will do the trick...
surely...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: the velvet glove...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: the velvet glove...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's not ridiculous, but....
Fake news, as in made up stories that purport to be informative, is news that is fake. Demeaning it as "so called" because you don't believe it's a big issue feels a bit hypocritical from someone whose country has just elected Donald "Pathological Liar" Trump to be their leader.
It is a problem and needs to be dealt with. However, you're right that censorship is not the solution. The real solution is for the real journals to rebuild the trust with their readers by reporting the news accurately, fairly, impartially, and clearly. And it that news happens to be detailing why fake news stories are wrong, then so be it.
I can't help feeling that the mainstream news websites are really not helping the cause when they're plastered with clickbait stories and intrusive adverts. If you want someone to read something, you really have to give it to them in a format that can be easily read.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
"The real solution is for the real journals to rebuild the trust with their readers"
I doubt this will solve the problem of corruption within the media industry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
I always that the Milgram Experiment was a warning, not a guideline.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
Within ten years we saw the term terrorist go from being applied to people like Mcveigh exclusively, to now being used to discuss the average armed gang member.
Not really - the phrase "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" has been around for a while.
What has happened is that terrorism has become much more commonplace across the world - where previously it was confined to certain hotspots - and therefore people are much more twitchy about it.
Having said that I do wonder if you would consider it comforting to be told "don't worry he's not a terrorist, he's just an armed gang member" if someone was pointing a machine gun at you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
"terrorism has become much more commonplace across the world"
Because now everyone you do not like is a terrorist, this was not the case prior to 911.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
Point is, all news is potentially "fake" - it depends upon to whom you are speaking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's not ridiculous, but....
Is there a name that the medical profession has given to this condition? Is it treatable?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hmmm...
Sure, sign me up!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hmmm...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can we call this what it is?
It's not "fake news". It is yellow journalism. We already have an appropriate term, that comes with significant history and lessons learned. Calling it fake news masks that history and leads me to wonder why someone chose to differentiate the two.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can we call this what it is?
Calling it fake news masks that history and leads me to wonder why someone chose to differentiate the two. Well "yellow journalism" doesn't mean anything unless you know that history (and given that the history is US based that pretty much exludes everyone else).
"Fake news" on the other hand pretty much "does what it says on the tin" (UK cultural reference).
Normally I'm against the idea of coming up with a new name for an old concept - but this time there may be a point - unless you think that the old term "propaganda" covers it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Can we call this what it is?
Now propaganda would certainly be an appropriate term to describe what has recently been called fake news, much of same could also be considered yellow journalism, both of which have been around since the dawn of human existence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Can we call this what it is?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Can we call this what it is?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Can we call this what it is?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Can we call this what it is?
"Calling it ‘fake news’ upsets me, because it's just lying.”
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Can we call this what it is?
I actually call it propaganda.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Can we call this what it is?
Usually the best propaganda aren't lies, they're just misleading or actually useless information if you look at what's really being said. Like all those phrases in advertising: "Up to 80% off!"*
*only applies to one product which will probably be sold out by the time you get here. everything else is normal price.
Where if they really wanted to be helpful and not deceptive, they would tell you everything is at least x% off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Can we call this what it is?
Interesting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Can we call this what it is?
No they are not, hence the term is made up of a phrase lie of omission as opposed to just the word lie.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Can we call this what it is?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Can we call this what it is?
Lying by omission is still lying. Though liars do like to pretend otherwise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Can we call this what it is?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Can we call this what it is?
lie n.
1.
an intentionally false statement.
If you've said nothing false, you've not lied.
But it is deceptive. It feels like a lie because people are so ingrained with the the cooperative principle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_principle
You generally assume people are being cooperative when speaking to you which leads you to all sorts of conclusions that are not necessarily sound because you've made an incorrect assumption (that the person was being cooperative).
http://www.qwantz.com/comics/comic2-1298.png
It's deceptive, it's arguably reprehensible, but it's not a lie.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Italy can lodge their fake journalists...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Look on the bright side...
There can be some very interesting outcomes for these laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Look on the bright side...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Look on the bright side...
Every law on the books has the potential for good or evil use. Considering how most governments think they are above the law what are the chances that the good application of the law is likely to outweigh the evil? We might as well start searching for unicorns because there is usually something incorrect where a human is involved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mussolini would be proud.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Mussolini would be proud.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you don't want a politician to lie, they would just have to stand there and not say anything.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Italy attempts to sneakily make memes illegal. Memes to be had... now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bring it to the US
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Bring it to the US
Nah, Star Trek is still in copyright, so they'd have to pay for it.
Probably put It's a Wonderful Life on a continuous loop since it's out of copyright, which is BTW why it's on every Christmas, it's free for the broadcasters.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Bring it to the US
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And rightfully so - period.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You can fool most of the people all of the time.
... you're not going to be happy ...
Unless of course, increasing the powers to censor and stifle and chill expression, just happens to be you're heart's desire, in which case;
"... you're going to sing tidings of comfort and joy ..."
might be a better choice of words.
Sigh. Someday, folks will realise that manufacturing crisis in order to create public demand for "protective" legislation, is nothing more than a business model... one that really works, and is thus used repeatedly to generate wealth by reverse interpretation, through precise wording that allows easy re-purposing.
One of the most common topics seen in these forums is the recognition of "loose" wording in new laws pertaining to copyright, innovation, and censorship, that can be used to do the opposite of what the law purports to be for.
It amazes me how this process by governments slides right past everyone, no matter how often its used.
Instead, the Grand Public Response is - a sigh, followed by the old adage of;
"Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to incompetence."
This is not a statement of what is.
Its an instruction taught by the 1% and learned by the rest.
Ah well, Hope Springs Eternal.
---
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Fake News Sucks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]