🇳🇱
Presuming that is the correct interpritation, then I agree with you. The main stream media or any other media should be allowed to decide for themselves what content they want to provide or not. However how liable are they for doing so.
If CNN says one day "drinking drain cleaner has been shown to be healthy and improve your lifespan", and people do it and get hurt, should they be able to sue? Likewise, when people stop vaccinating and we have worldwide pandemics resurging and billions in medical costs, would the mainstream media be able to be sued for false information?
While they should have the right to say whatever they want, they also need to be held liable for doing so. I think if you tell main stream media if they go preaching anti-vax nonsense in general (such as not to get your measles vaccines) then they should know that means they need to pay millions of dollars to all the people who get measles from watching the show. That alone would probably be the same (effectively) as not permitting the content on the show considering it would be a huge deterrent.
@bandrew@noagendasocial.com
福神龍 On the flip side, the Media should then be responsible for each adverse effect of the drugs it pushes on people as "proven" or because of "experts" and the like. Or, for the heart attacks the fast food companies cause which advertise on their networks. They should be liable for all consequences of any activity they are a party to.
I agree, if the media sells the vaccine as safe and hides the fact it skipped certain safety tests, and people get sick beyond the safety margins, then yes, they should be held responsible for hiding the risks.
@MountainJay @bandrew@noagendasocial.com
Generally even in america you would be, you are liable for what you say to a certain extent.
Thats why news organzations dont say "This thing is good for your health" (then they are liable).. they say "So and so says this is good for your health" (now mr so and so is liable).
@anon00110 @bandrew@noagendasocial.com @MountainJay
hmmmm
For them its a matter of honor. You don't recommend something unless you're absolutely sure there aren't any skeletons that are going to get caught.
ex. in the US mentality you can argue "well our supplier fucked us, so we're not liable, so sue someone else."
in Japanese mentality, you should have picked a supplier that was reliable.