Starring political commentator Steven Bonnell II (Destiny), Faces of Free Speech integrates different perspectives on free speech into a synthesis view.Faces of X is a reader-supported publication.
On the substance, however, I wish he had more to say not only on WHAT is being said but also WHO can say them to WHOM. I think they're just as important and everybody knows it -we restrict children from certain content, we don't allow witnesses to lie-, and might just be the thing that would regulate today's media environment!
Hi Stephanie you amazing writer, glad to see your interactions with the fans!
An amazing addition to who can speak could be that if you have a massive platform (let's say we quantified that by the capacity of getting 1 million views per day), you'd have to follow only one of two styles:
1. The academic style: having a dry cover of issues and news, representing all relevant sides of an issue fairly, and meeting a standard of factuality. You would be judged on these matters by renowned institutions, and based on what they find, you could lose your license to cover news and controversial issues.
2. The entertaining style: no controversy or serious news is allowed; good vibes only.
This would greatly improve the media ecosystem.
If we fear that those renowned institutions might have too much power, let's decentralize and democratize them!
People would vote for representatives for the House of Media. Their tasks are to choose which private institutions should get the power of licensing, to write the laws of accountability for these institutions, and to call for investigations and trials when they or mass media corporations or individuals break the law.
Every two years or so there will be a re-election.
*Personally, I'd rather we have additional votes per person if they have academic degrees or have their cut of the house, but this mix of technocracy and democracy is not popular in the US.
Love the concept and the message of people being partially right, people pick and choose what sounds right for them, and mostly we all want to live in a world with the virtues that we think are good
Steven is a good actor actually.
On the substance, however, I wish he had more to say not only on WHAT is being said but also WHO can say them to WHOM. I think they're just as important and everybody knows it -we restrict children from certain content, we don't allow witnesses to lie-, and might just be the thing that would regulate today's media environment!
I was impressed with Steven's acting skills too!
On *who* can speak.....what would be an example of restricting speech based on the person who's speaking? (Anyone can be a witness.)
Hi Stephanie you amazing writer, glad to see your interactions with the fans!
An amazing addition to who can speak could be that if you have a massive platform (let's say we quantified that by the capacity of getting 1 million views per day), you'd have to follow only one of two styles:
1. The academic style: having a dry cover of issues and news, representing all relevant sides of an issue fairly, and meeting a standard of factuality. You would be judged on these matters by renowned institutions, and based on what they find, you could lose your license to cover news and controversial issues.
2. The entertaining style: no controversy or serious news is allowed; good vibes only.
This would greatly improve the media ecosystem.
If we fear that those renowned institutions might have too much power, let's decentralize and democratize them!
People would vote for representatives for the House of Media. Their tasks are to choose which private institutions should get the power of licensing, to write the laws of accountability for these institutions, and to call for investigations and trials when they or mass media corporations or individuals break the law.
Every two years or so there will be a re-election.
*Personally, I'd rather we have additional votes per person if they have academic degrees or have their cut of the house, but this mix of technocracy and democracy is not popular in the US.
To answer your question directly: If you're not licensed, you shouldn't be able to discuss serious issues on mass media.
Holycow this came outta nowhere and absolutely impressed tf outta me! What an amazing piece of content!
Love the concept and the message of people being partially right, people pick and choose what sounds right for them, and mostly we all want to live in a world with the virtues that we think are good
AMEN <3