[ckaihatsu]

Jones could argue he does what he does for the social good.

Anyway, this isn’t finished. May sanity prevail.

See -- you're arguing *defensively*, on the side of Jones' *private interests*.

*Is it* for 'the social good', or is it for the *billionaire* wealth.

'Society', in the form of the courts, has said that what Jones does is *not* for the social good.

[ness31]

See -- you're arguing *defensively*, on the side of Jones' *private interests*.

*Is it* for 'the social good', or is it for the *billionaire* wealth.

'Society', in the form of the courts, has said that what Jones does is *not* for the social good.

Yes.

[XogGyux]

YES YES YES!

[ckaihatsu]

Thanks.

[AFAIK]

@ness31
If you want to go abroad to make your point then pick any country in East Asia. Jones would be spending the rest of his life in prison for defamation on top of paying the fine.

[Rancid]

Will he pay it though?

He lied. He knowingly lied.

He won't but this puts corporate entities like Fox News on notice for the bullshit lies they spread via that pendejo Tucker Carlson.

[Politics_Observer]

@Rancid

I hope it does though it does not seem to be the case. They will try to hide behind the 1st amendment rather than trying to offer genuinely objective journalism.

[ckaihatsu]

Turkey's parliament adopts media law jailing those spreading 'disinformation'

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-ea ... 022-10-13/

[ness31]

Yes.

[ckaihatsu]

Yes.

It *sounds* good, like that's what should generically / universally be the general government public policy, right -- ?

Prosecution of 'disinformation' -- but the article describes it being done for *pro-Turkish-nationalism* policy reasons.

In a better world the 'free speech' (bourgeois) standard would be proactively aimed in such potentially *progressive* directions, as for government enforcement against domestic fascist terrorism, *and* all of its Alex-Jones-type bullshit disinformation -- as an entire media *industry*, conceivably.

[ness31]

Yes.

[Rich]

You see this is why I have my zero tolerance policy. Zero tolerance for those that that support libel and slander laws whining about Epstein. Zero tolerance for those that that support libel and slander laws whining about Jimmey Saville. Zero tolerance for those that that support libel and slander laws whining about Jeremy Thorpe getting away with attempted murder

The problem is that there are a lot of retarded narcissists who can't seem to grasp that free speech means allowing bad speech. That to get the immense benefits of free speech you have to allow harmful speech. The courts shouldn't be the arbiter of what people say. I think jury trials are a good thing but they're not perfect. We saw with the trial of OJ Simpson that with politicised cases, getting the result you want is largely a case of getting the right jury.

[ckaihatsu]

allowing bad speech

*Or* government could be proactively *pro-people*, and could look to *regulate*, for certain 'civil contours' (my terming). Like how about *no bullshit* -- for the sake of a sane civil society *over* commercial interests for putting anything out there, even fascism, just for the ad revenue. Right now the Google News site that I use every week has a 'Fact Check' sidebar of fact-checking news stories, a feature which arrived at the same time as the *Trump presidency*.

[Tainari88]

He won't but this puts corporate entities like Fox News on notice for the bullshit lies they spread via that pendejo Tucker Carlson.

You love Tucker pendejo. Es tu novio...lo amas, lo quieres, es tu comandante.

No le puedes dar el ultimo adios...never can say goodbye to Tucker...mi ultimo adios...

[wat0n]

Great news. Hopefully this will teach conspiracy nuts defamation has consequences.

[Puffer Fish]

This is an example of emotion and mob mentality from a bunch of a dumb people ruling the day.

Anyone with any sense would realise the amount of money awarded was absurd and ridiculous.

Seems like all the people in this forum are too stupid to realise that.

In addition, it sets a concerning precedent for freedom of the press.

There was likely political bias because Alex Jones lives in Texas but the jury that awarded this money was in Connecticut, a progressive Leftist Democrat place that doesn't like Alex Jones.

In my opinon, what Alex Jones did was wrong and even reprehensible, but that does not mean he should be held completely responsible for what other people did, nor does it mean he "deserves whatever he gets".

Why does it seem the throngs of supporters on the Progressive Left are only able to think with emotions?

Alex Jones did not get branded "Right Wing" until Obama. Before then the media did not make a peep out of him while he was criticising Bush.

[Godstud]

This is an example of emotion and mob mentality from a bunch of a dumb people ruling the day.

Courts are not ruled by emotion, You have no argument. You only whine and complain.

Anyone with any sense would realise the amount of money awarded was absurd and ridiculous.

Given how much Alex Jones is worth, and how much is usually awarded from such things, it is reasonable. He will not end up paying the full amount. Only someone separated from reality would think that would be the case.

Seems like all the people in this forum are too stupid to realise that.

Only you fit that description. You are projecting your own inadequacies.

In addition, it sets a concerning precedent for freedom of the press.

Freedom stops at slander and lies. You can't yell, "Fire!!", in a movie theatre, either. Alex Jones was not "The Press", either.

Your opinion is idiotic and solely based on emotion. If you believed what he did was "truly reprehensible", you wouldn't be complaining.

Courts are not run on emotion. Your argument is based in a false belief and delusion... as usual.

[Rich]

Great news. Hopefully this will teach conspiracy nuts defamation has consequences.

There have been countless cases where rich and powerful people and organisations have used the threat of libel and slander to cover up abusive, fraudulent and criminal behaviour. So the potential good of suppressing people with misinformed views would be far, far outweighed by the suppression of the truth.

But seriously do you think this judgement will persuade the millions of people who are sympathetic to Alex Jones radical theories that he's wrong. Of course not. It will have precisely the reverse effect. How in God's name is this ruling meant to persuade people that our democracies are real and that we live in genuinely open societies where the rich and powerful can be challenged in the mainstream media?

[Godstud]

@Rich Alex Jones IS rich and powerful. He has a net worth of $900 million.

[Potemkin]

@Rich Alex Jones IS rich and powerful. He has a net worth of $900 million.

@Godstud Read Robert Maxwell’s Wikipedia page to get some idea of what @Rich is talking about. Hard cases make bad laws.