Something has to be done to stop Breitbart and Bannon.

[imanamerican63]

He is going to destroy the good people in the Senate and Congress on both sides of the isle with "fake news" stories. I am not sure what can be done, but we have to find way to shut this fool and his new outlet.

Any ideas? I am serious.

[Voltaire2]

1. I'm pretty sure the first amendment protects bullshit.

So sorry, no.

[Eliot Rosewater]

7. It's not bullshit, it is highly dangerous and lethal propaganda that would

make Joseph Goebbels stand up and take notice.

Protected up to a point.

[Afromania]

10. My feeling is Breitbart will eventually run him down for inciting.

Unfortunately, it's probably going to take something beyond the beyond before action is taken.

[Voltaire2]

13. So you would empower the government to decide which "propaganda"

should be allowed, and which should not?

Nah. That is exactly what the 1st amendment prohibits.

[Eliot Rosewater]

14. Strawman much?

Even the casual observer of our constitution knows speech has limits.

Unpopular positions and lies are protected, incitement is not.

The Supreme Court has held that "advocacy of the use of force" is unprotected when it is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action" and is "likely to incite or produce such action

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions#Incitement

Eventually someone like Bannon/Breitbart will go too far, the question is will we have a single honest judge left to enforce the constitution?

And then there is False statements of fact

The Supreme Court has established a complex framework in determining which types of false statements are unprotected.[10] There are four such areas which the Court has been explicit about. First, false statements of fact that are said with a "sufficiently culpable mental state" can be subject to civil or criminal liability.[11] Secondly, knowingly making a false statement of fact can almost always be punished. For example, libel and slander law are permitted under this category. Third, negligently false statements of fact may lead to civil liability in some instances.[12] Additionally, some implicit statements of fact—those that may just have a "false factual connotation"—still could fall under this exception.[13][14]

There is also a fifth category of analysis. It is possible that some completely false statements could be entirely free from punishment. The Supreme Court held in the landmark case New York Times v. Sullivan (1964) that lies about the government may be protected completely.[15] However, this category is not entirely clear, as the question of whether false historical or medical claims are protected is still disputed.[16]

Obscenity[edit]

I always defer to lawyers, like I did when I was wrong about how it turns out an employer can make you do any ridiculous nonsense he
or she wants you to unless you are in a union that has an agreement prohibiting it; I am willing to be educated about speech by a lawyer if someone wants to educate us.



I KNEW I was wasting my time

[Voltaire2]

15. Oh my mistake I thought you were advocating censoring breitbart for what they are doing now.

Not some hypothetical breitbart in the future.

Don't know how I could have made that mistake.

[Eliot Rosewater]

16. You are wasting your time, I said protected up to a point on purpose, to

lay out the potential for what they are doing and how it could either already be unprotected speech or on the way there.

Either one.

In 1978 I didnt know much, but it didnt take long for me to figure out why the ACLU did what they did and I fully supported it and I would again.

What is happening or could very easily be happening with Bannon is different. He is on record

Bannon vows a daily fight for ‘deconstruction of the administrative state’

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/top-wh-strategist-vows-a-daily-fight-for-deconstruction-of-the-administrative-state/2017/02/23/03f6b8da-f9ea-11e6-bf01-d47f8cf9b643_story.html?utm_term=.6fee3e06209c

What he wants is to destroy our government, we know that, so it is not a stretch to predict that he will go over the line and soon.

[Voltaire2]

17. So you agree that there is basically nothing the government can do to shut down "fake news".

This was what the op asked, and what I responded to.

Deconstructing the administrative state is a platform for political reform, not advocacy of violent overthrow of the government.

[NightWatcher]

2. Lets wait until after he destroys the gop.

[Afromania]

3. Offer him a spot on the "space ark", also tell him he gets to lead humanity into the future...

Don't tell him it's going to be an one way trip.

[The_Casual_Observer]

4. THese things end up eventually taking care of themselves

unfortunately it takes a long time sometimes.

Bannon will step on the wrong toes and poof. That piece of shit is funded by people that wanted trump and what trump was going to do for them, when it's clear that it isn't working
poof.

[Cary]

5. Counter their propaganda

Never give up

[maxsolomon]

8. You cannot counter it with their audience

Because they won't consume your alternative.

Delegitimize it as a news source? It worked with Glenn Beck.

[maxsolomon]

6. A Libel Suit

like the one that took down Gawker?

Hulk Hogan had a deep-pockets backer that funded it, but they just mutated and came back.

[Girard442]

9. I'm a First Amendment fanatic, but I wonder sometimes...

...can democracies survive when constantly inundated with billionaire-supported tsunamis of bullshit?

What would a solution look like?

[GulfCoast66]

11. France. 1795?

I kid. They are talking themselves into a circular firing squad as we type.

[world wide wally]

12. A couple of years ago, I would have said that we have to educate people.

Now I realize that they are too stupid to educate.