Comment by IntelMiner
Comment by IntelMiner 6 hours ago
If someone tells me the sky is blue, and then someone else tells me the sky is purple, I'm not going to believe it's purple just because "the government" tells me the weather forecast
Comment by IntelMiner 6 hours ago
If someone tells me the sky is blue, and then someone else tells me the sky is purple, I'm not going to believe it's purple just because "the government" tells me the weather forecast
I'd counter that simply asserting that the Brazilian government is in the wrong over Elon Musk is a fools errand.
I'm far more concerned about disinformation peddled by oligarchs like Rupert Murdoch. But while we're citing history
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Opinion_(book)
This book is so old it's legally in the public domain. Perhaps give it a read
That's something you can vetify yourself though. What if the government claimed that Polish soldiers attacked the German border, you claimed that it was actually German soldiers in Polish uniforms to give Germany a casus belli to invade, and a court censored your claim because they insist it's misinformation? How the hell is the average citizen going to determine what is misinformation or not there if any counterarguments or evidence are censored?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident
I have a hard time believing you're this naive about this. Either you really haven't thought through the repercussions, or you're in favor of it because it's being used against your political enemies (for now).