Should Media Companies be held responsible for their lies?

As a nurse I worked all the way through the pandemic and saw the results of the lies. I even had to treat a woman so afraid she refused all our attempts to help and watch her family break as she passed then blame us for not treating her, since they have calmed down and understand we cannot force treatment on a person. The lies about us trying to kill her and everyone caused this. These are easy to pick out and blame though, I blame the Polotian's lies above all when we were first warned we were warned it was happening they all chanted the same story We have it under control, we are well prepared, and the biggest one of all WE HAVE A PLAN.

 

The problem is we now live in a world where too many think their PERSONAL OPINION is equal to expert opinion. Doctors I know hear every day "I am the PARENT and I KNOW BEST on treatment". The show House used to make fun of this with little cut outs in his forced Clinic Hours. Personal favorite that comes to mind is the severe asthmatic kid having issues and he looks at the chart, asks "Is he using his inhaler?" and the mother says "I have REAL CONCERNS with young people using a strong steroid!". He, unlike most doctors, responded "But no issue with his airways possibly closing and him dying". Then proceeds, albeit in the condescending House way, to explain asthma and albuterol and why that "strong steroid is needed". The "I am the parent that fact I gave birth gives me magic WISDOM on medical matters" movement had just started catching steam again back then.

It is the same with media. There is a reason, well three IMO that we are where we are with media.

One. We went from there being the 6 o'clock news to 6, 24 hour networks. There is now a 4 hour morning show. News at 12. News starts at 4 or 5 and runs till 7 or 8 on broadcast. We have Fox Business and CNBC now, the ACTUAL CAUSE of a lot of the STOCK MARKET SHIT that happened recently and why we BUBBLE MORE now! 2007, and I know people who work on Wall Street that 100% agree, is MITIGATED if not avoided, if Fox Business and CNBC plus CNN, MSNBC, Fox and all the broadcast were not babbling 24/7 about it. Bernake was not on TV 15 times a day talking about it!. We actually need LESS news broadcasts. The best thing that could happen would be for Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, Fox Business and CNBC to have 1 show about the news. At the normal 6 PM. A few talk shows (I have to concede that 8-11, that wont go away). But until 6? Barring MAJOR NEWS like a former POTUS or someone important dying, 1/6, etc? Programed shows. Not news stories on REPEAT for 20 hours.

Two. The Talk. The Chew. The VIEW for F sure. Etc all need to go. So HOUSEWIVES need to get their news from NEWS. Not clucking HENS and FORMER PLAYBOY BUNNIES blathering about 10 year debunked research. What was that? The reason so many believe the Vaccines cause AUTISM? Is that Jenny "I posed naked and that made me FAMOUS" McCarthy spent years on the View, unchallenged, saying her friend the doctor (see after) said so and proved it. The problem? That doctor lost his license when he was CAUGHT doctoring the study. To fit a lawsuit he was hired to find proof for. And to back HIS LINE OF VACCINES. Years before she was on the damned show. But the other 4 clucking hens let her say it unchallenged.

Three. The Baby Boomer Era (some not all) mentality of "Oh let them believe what they want. It avoids CONFLICT!". Mixed with years of overinflating the importance of "blue collar" and "essential workers". Yes truckers. If you dont truck? Things dont get on shelves. That does not mean you are an expert on everything now because of that. Yes Road Crew workers. You pave the roads. Still does not change your lack of expertise on many subjects. Part Time Cashiers? Housewives? You likely dont have a good grasp on Micro or Macro Economics as a whole. Experts are experts. Non experts are non experts.

Speaking of truckers, and totally off subject. Covid taught us one thing. Just in Time? Is great for Maximizing Profit. But horrible for supply chains unless everything is working almost perfectly top to bottom. One tooth on one cog breaks and it all falls apart because it get there "Just in Time" now.

Totally on subject? Yes. They should be responsible. And Congress should pass a law requiring either LARGE disclaimers of "opinion" or you are "liable under libel/defamation". It is not hard. But both sides would suffer having to segregate news from TALK.

 

Media companies are unaccountable for their actions. They don't care if they post truths or lies. They don't care if they censor truths or lies. They only care if it will get them more money. Section 230 needs to be modified to strip these companies of protection if they violate other peoples rights. Also the media companies should have absolutely zero rights to censor or suppress their users speech. If they do, they should be fined a million dollars per post that they suppress, so if they suppress a million people posting one thing its a billion dollar fine. If they suppress one person posting a million times, that a billion dollar fine. If a user makes an unlawful post, then the company should report the user to the authorities and the media company should be restricted from removing the unlawful post till so ordered by the courts. Media companies should have no rights to ban or delete anyone without a court order. If they don't do this, then every protection from 230 should be revoked and the companies open to millions of lawsuits. They abused the protection so they should lose the protection.

 

Media companies are not Facebook, Twitter, etc. Their purpose is not "delivering you news". It is "allowing you to communicate with others, within agreed upon rules". They are not the government. They are not a news organization. They are a clearinghouse at best. Should we be held responsible for not allowing everyone who is a member here to do anything that is "legal"?

 

Companies like Facebook, Twitter, Rumble, and Truth Social are private companies but they have created a public soapbox allowing people to have their say. Once these companies open up their platform to the public, if they start censoring what the public is saying, short of illegal content, the media companies would then be guilty of discrimination. If they discriminate then they should be open to lawsuits. It would be like a restaurant saying they will serve some people because they are White, but not serve other people because they are Black.

 

They have you sign a Terms of Service. The problem is that people dont want to take the time to read that. Then want to claim discrimination. When you clicked "I agree"? You agreed to them moderating your "Speech". The fact you are commenting on a news article? Not relevant. The fact you posted something as news? Irrelevant. They have your agreement to abide by their "moderation", not "If it is not illegal.......". It is not a "Public Soapbox". Facebook, Twitter, etc are not a box on a corner or in the town square. They are Private Entities with their own rules. Who can enforce those rules. Whether or not those rules are enforced on things that are not "illegal".

Lets flip that. Guess businesses have to serve all then dont they? Cant have "Faith Based beliefs" can they? Cant refuse business or have rules outside of "laws". Laws like "You can not refuse the LGBTQ community in CO".