Trump's War on the Press: American Trust in the Press Lowest in Decades

[lilelvis]

I put it in bold, just for you. How did you miss that?

How'd you miss this?:

"First off, the good news. The large majority of Americans, 85%, agree that the “Freedom of the press is essential for American democracy.” Additionally, two-thirds (68%) say that “reporters should be protected from pressure from government or big business interests.” Majorities of both Democrats and Republicans agree with these two statements signaling deep support for the concept of freedom of the press."

 

[Deleted member 457759]

Nope. You're wrong.

Every major poll was within the margin of error.

The election was decided by 20,000 votes in two states my dude.

You are entirely full of shit my friend lol. Verbal gymnastics and muddying the waters wont work here.

I don't give a shit about margin of errors either, those goal posts can be moved wherever. It's not about margin of error it's about accurate or inaccurate.

Polls that were normally accurate were inaccurate!! Get it?

 

[JosephDredd]

How'd you miss this?:

"First off, the good news. The large majority of Americans, 85%, agree that the “Freedom of the press is essential for American democracy.” Additionally, two-thirds (68%) say that “reporters should be protected from pressure from government or big business interests.” Majorities of both Democrats and Republicans agree with these two statements signaling deep support for the concept of freedom of the press."

And yet 43% of Republicans specifically said that the President should be able to shut down news organizations that don't behave. It's almost like both statements can be totally true...

 

[Devout Pessimist]

More pathetic straw grabbing.
And these are only libel laws, it's not a call for censorship necessarily. It's a call for responsibility. It's a slippery slope for sure but not what the left wants it to be. The left is the true anti free speech crowd who supports hate speech laws and all kinds of censorship.

In the old days it was conservatives censoring nudity and course language. Today it's the left wanting to censor literally everything that challenges their ideology.

Responsibility is exactly what many people are calling for. Think before you say something and take responsibility for the backlash when you say something stupid. Everybody wants the Right to speak, but nobody wants to be held Responsible for what they say. The Rights and no responsibilities mentality is a big problem with society these days. Rights have become synonymous with entitlements.

 

[tinker_190]

Trump supporters never really said anything when Trump promised to undo the first amendment during the campaign (nor did they freak out when he agreed with Hillary's gun control policy during a debate) and now almost half of Republicans are against the first amendment.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/americans-views-media-2018-08-07



Re: bold - Alex Jones is in trouble if the people ever take back power.

The bolded question is worded very... oddly. What constitutes bad behavior?

Full disclosure: I completely support free speech as both a legal tenant and philosophical concept

 

[Deleted member 457759]

Responsibility is exactly what many people are calling for. Think before you speak say something and take responsibility for the backlash when you say something stupid. Everybody wants the Right to speak, but nobody wants to be held Responsible for what they say. The Rights and no responsibilities mentality is a big problem with society these days. Rights have become synonymous with entitlements.

A lot of people are calling for it myself included but what's the answer? Many solutions are slippery slopes intended on hamstringing their political opposition. Or they're religious in nature, or they're intended to reinforce an ideology in some way.

It's a tough one. So we can't maintain democracy without freedom of speech (I'm hoping we can all agree on that at least). But if total freedom of speech means I can destroy a life or many lives with a harrassment or assault claim, without any evidence, then clearly we have a serious problem.

It's not right that I go around yelling the N word but I'm not upset about it because I'll end up marginalized socially and under immediate physical threat. So society governs a lot of this on it's own so I don't feel we need the government to sensor there.

 

[lilelvis]

And yet 43% of Republicans specifically said that the President should be able to shut down news organizations that don't behave. It's almost like both statements can be totally true...

That's a good point. Those two statements are, very likely, not true looking at the numbers. It'd be interesting to see how the questions were worded to manipulate the answers.

 

[Rational Poster]

You are entirely full of shit my friend lol. Verbal gymnastics and muddying the waters wont work here.

I don't give a shit about margin of errors either, those goal posts can be moved wherever. It's not about margin of error it's about accurate or inaccurate.

Polls that were normally accurate were inaccurate!! Get it?

The polls were accurate.

Sorry this hurts your feelings.

Trump won by 20,000 votes in two states. Polls aren't accurate down to the vote.

The most popular polling site in existing gave Trump more than 30% chance to win.

 

[JosephDredd]

That's a good point. Those two statements are, very likely, not true looking at the numbers. It'd be interesting to see how the questions were worded to manipulate the answers.

They don't need to manipulate it at all and both can still be true.

"Hey, you. Do you support the concept of freedom of speech?"

"I sure do. It's essential."

"Awesome. Do you support the idea that the president can shut down newspapers that misbehave?"

"Yes. The press has the power to be the enemy of the people if they decided to print lies and destroy people."

"How can you answer yes to both questions?"

"I guess because my idea of 'Freedom of Speech' is different than @lilelvis 's idea of Freedom of speech so, you see, I can still honestly answer yes to both questions without needing to be manipulated. It's how every human being functions in some part of their life, wherein two beliefs or actions contradict each other and they're blind to the hypocrisy."

Ta-da.

 

[lilelvis]

They don't need to manipulate it at all and both can still be true.

"Hey, you. Do you support the concept of freedom of speech?"

"I sure do. It's essential."

"Awesome. Do you support the idea that the president can shut down newspapers that misbehave?"

"Yes. The press has the power to be the enemy of the people if they decided to print lies and destroy people."

"How can you answer yes to both questions?"

"I guess because my idea of 'Freedom of Speech' is different than @lilelvis 's idea of Freedom of speech so, you see, I can still honestly answer yes to both questions without needing to be manipulated. It's how every human being functions in some part of their life, wherein two beliefs or actions contradict each other and they're blind to the hypocrisy."

Ta-da.

Or:


"Hey, Joe. Do you support the concept of freedom of speech?"

"I sure do. It's essential."

"Awesome. Do you support the idea that the president can shut down newspapers that misbehave?"

"Yes. If the President is a democrat"

Ta-da.

 

[JosephDredd]

Or:


"Hey, Joe. Do you support the concept of freedom of speech?"

"I sure do. It's essential."

"Awesome. Do you support the idea that the president can shut down newspapers that misbehave?"

"Yes. If the President is a democrat"

Ta-da.

Are we in agreement now? I think we are.

 

[lilelvis]

Are we in agreement now? I think we are.

Maybe? Probably not, but maybe.....

 

[Trotsky]

Until I hear conservatives call for misgendering as hate speech or against the law liberals will always be well ahead in that category.

Only someone completely uninformed about free speech law in the United States would say liberals are a greater threat to it than conservatives. That's about as LOL-worthy a statement as could be made.

All of American history has been conservatives attacking free speech and liberals defending it, from the free press, to civil rights demonstrators, to labor activists, to war protesters, to flag burners. Hell, it was even the liberals who stuck their neck out to protect the free speech rights of Republican-supporting Klan members.

 

[Rygu]

Only someone completely uninformed about free speech law in the United States would say liberals are a greater threat to it than conservatives. That's about as LOL-worthy a statement as could be made.

All of American history has been conservatives attacking free speech and liberals defending it, from the free press, to civil rights demonstrators, to labor activists, to war protesters, to flag burners. Hell, it was even the liberals who stuck their neck out to protect the free speech rights of Republican-supporting Klan members.

Yeah I don't disagree with you, but things appear to have changed a fair bit in the last 5-10 years. Do you agree or no?

 

[Devout Pessimist]

A lot of people are calling for it myself included but what's the answer? Many solutions are slippery slopes intended on hamstringing their political opposition. Or they're religious in nature, or they're intended to reinforce an ideology in some way.

It's a tough one. So we can't maintain democracy without freedom of speech (I'm hoping we can all agree on that at least). But if total freedom of speech means I can destroy a life or many lives with a harrassment or assault claim, without any evidence, then clearly we have a serious problem.

It's not right that I go around yelling the N word but I'm not upset about it because I'll end up marginalized socially and under immediate physical threat. So society governs a lot of this on it's own so I don't feel we need the government to sensor there.

I think it is pretty clear what society has deemed to be unacceptable to say. If you avoid blatant racist (racism against whites is completely acceptable), homophobic and misogynist language as well as crude comments about pedophilia, then you should not have too much trouble. I have no problem with society setting boundaries and limits. Free-speech is a right, but we also have a Responsibility to be civilized with our speech.

 

[IReallyDoTrainUFC]

Both the right and the left in America are against the first amendment, just in different ways.

 

[Dolomite]

But - but - muh President Lincoln!

You want to talk about the Executive putting his thumb down on das media? Fucking Abe Lincoln would snap some scrawny reporter's neck 2 - 3 times a week.

Abe sold the story that a Higher Law of self-preservation (wait for it) supersedes all man-written law, including the 1A.

(quite a few Editors back then penned articles celebrating Lincoln's assassination. Thank God that'd never happen these days )

 

[Deleted member 457759]

I think it is pretty clear what society has deemed to be unacceptable to say. If you avoid blatant racist (racism against whites is completely acceptable), homophobic and misogynist language as well as crude comments about pedophilia, then you should not have too much trouble. I have no problem with society setting boundaries and limits. Free-speech is a right, but we also have a Responsibility to be civilized with our speech.

I agree. It's like threats, they are "speech" but because they are often a precursor to violence and can cause real emotion harm most of society agrees they should be censored to some degree.

But lobbying the government to criminalize speech outside of threats and calls for violence is too dangerous to me. When have we seen it work? Even with holocaust denial in Europe it didnt seem to be effective, I could make arguments it made it worse for that matter.

 

[RerouteToRemain]

And yet 43% of Republicans specifically said that the President should be able to shut down news organizations that don't behave. It's almost like both statements can be totally true...

What do they mean by close/shut down. Revoke press credentials to the President's speeches, press conference, etc or literally shut them down.

 

[HunterSdVa29]

the fact that virtually every media outlet is owned by a Trust-esque corporation, yet people still act like it's 'free speech' is always funny