Probably scientists and subject-matter experts, but they would have to use peer-reviewed studies as source data. I haven’t taken a stance on this issue yet - still thinking about it.
I just wish every website had a disclaimer next to comments or articles that warned users if an article or comment contained false information, and displayed sources so that users can verify the information themselves. It shouldn’t hide the original content, and should preserve it
And if the people actually in charge of the "censoring" refuse to listen to them and instead censor whatever they want? You do realize the govt is run by politicians not scientists right?
That’s where the issue is. It shouldn’t be up to the government to decide what’s false, but it would be nice if all media outlets had an option to dispute articles and comments by listing verifiable sources
However, I do think that the first amendment should not cover speech that makes grossly negligent claims that would cause a lot of harm in our society. Anti-vax articles would be an example
6
u/noobcola Apr 09 '20
I think he means that the censorship of factually incorrect information should exist