Should Certain Types Of Lying About Elections--E.g. Polling Times, Places, and Methods--Be Illegal?
Interesting question.
We're talking about intentional falsehoods that aim at preventing people from casting votes--e.g. telling people that they can vote via text message.
Presumption goes to a negative answer. Those who want to restrict speech have the burden of proof. The way to combat such deceptive tactics is to make accurate information easily accessible, and to reveal false information as false. Voters also have a measure of responsibility. If you can easily be convinced that you can vote via text, you're doing something wrong.
But it's not a stupid proposal.
But I wouldn't support it, off the top of my head.
We're talking about intentional falsehoods that aim at preventing people from casting votes--e.g. telling people that they can vote via text message.
Presumption goes to a negative answer. Those who want to restrict speech have the burden of proof. The way to combat such deceptive tactics is to make accurate information easily accessible, and to reveal false information as false. Voters also have a measure of responsibility. If you can easily be convinced that you can vote via text, you're doing something wrong.
But it's not a stupid proposal.
But I wouldn't support it, off the top of my head.
posted by Winston Smith at
10:35 AM
2 Comments:
There are laws requiring that advertisements for products "must be truthful, not misleading, and, when appropriate, backed by scientific evidence." Does that precedent move the needle for you at all?
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/media-resources/truth-advertising
Yeah, I think that if we are ok with restrictions like that, we've already opened the door. Now we're quibbling about details.
Which makes me wonder about truth in advertising laws... Dunno whether to ponens or tollens.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home