The debate "If fake news can potentially be very dangerous are 1st Amend rights for press still relevant today" was started by
April 18, 2018, 10:10 pm.
15 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 3 people are on the disagree side.
People are starting to choose their side.
It looks like most of the people in this community are on the agreeing side of this statement.
Matthew354 posted 1 argument, Slymcfly posted 1 argument to the agreers part.
Matthew354, devindel, LiberalsAversion, Slymcfly and 11 visitors agree.
3 visitors disagree.
example of lack of credibility?
While still relevant, we should always hold the media accountable for their credibility, or lack thereof. (talking about you CNN and NBC/MSNBC
Eh, a lot of activists and judges stick up for free speech rights when it comes down to brass tacks.
Are you refering to some specific event?
All speech is protected in the one on one showdown as long as neither man draws.
Yellow-bellied cowards have protected free speech in public only when hiding behind bodyguards, or even security hired by others.
Not all speech is actually protected, (like libel and slander, as well as threatening felonies and conspiracy to commit felonies,) but pursuing large, moneyed groups like the press in court is very difficult. Get rid of court fees, and that would give people a way to hold media accountable.
It's terrible that people who make money off of lying are so rich and powerful that they would contemplate attacking the second amendment so they can laugh at those who lie to get out of poverty. Acting and theatrics are all forms of lying and pretending. Nobody owns a monopoly on who can make money from that.
your right in the pure sense, but it does take strongly from democracy.
the press isnt as essential for the republic as lawmakers will get direct intelligence, it is the democratic aspects of our nation that depend on the press.
I'm going off on a tangent with this, but America is not a democracy.
yes. the press is essential to democracy.