We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Media Information Act
Details
Submitted by[?]: United Democrats
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: November 2822
Description[?]:
| The media should not be allowed to publish proven falsehoods, The NDPR are strongly opposed to media sanctions but feel it is a dangerous thing for media stations to provide people with false information. We don't feel this legislative infringes on the freedom of press/speech, but we welcome any debate on this matter. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The government's policy regarding regulation of media content.
Old value:: There are no content regulations; the media may publish anything, even proven falsehoods.
Current: There are laws against the publication of false information; everything else may be published freely.
Proposed: There are laws against the publication of false information; everything else may be published freely.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 22:19:18, September 22, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Restoration Party | To | Debating the Media Information Act |
| Message | We recall this bill being brought up many, many years ago and have not heard it since. It is a valid argument. The OP will consider this. |
| Date | 01:39:15, September 23, 2009 CET | From | Liberal Democratic Party | To | Debating the Media Information Act |
| Message | At the moment an individual can sue following the publication of false information. Is this not a better system than beginning to make laws about what people can and can't publish? |
| Date | 02:46:45, September 23, 2009 CET | From | United Democrats | To | Debating the Media Information Act |
| Message | At the moment an individual can sue for falsehoods about their person. This act prohibits the spread of false information that could be harmful to health, the economy and society itself. We need to protect our citizens from potentially devastating false information. |
| Date | 13:42:32, September 23, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Heritage Party | To | Debating the Media Information Act |
| Message | We welcome discussion on this matter - we may be willing to support this legislation, and can see valid reason for it. We have not yet decided, however, whether we will support it or not. |
| Date | 14:54:48, September 23, 2009 CET | From | Liberal Democratic Party | To | Debating the Media Information Act |
| Message | The LDP is too undecided on this issue but has a further question. Doesn't free speech entail the listener to decide what is false. If they are being told 'potentially devestating information' that is flase it is their perogative to cast aside the publication. Furthermore, dos this require a state run 'Ministry of Information' to say what can can can't be published? |
| Date | 23:01:50, September 23, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Restoration Party | To | Debating the Media Information Act |
| Message | We recognize the damage that publishing falsehoods may pose, both personal (to those about which it is written) and perhaps even economic damage. However, we at the OP have decided that this step is an infringement on the rights to free speech which we cannot partake in. We cannot support this bill. |
| Date | 02:09:33, September 24, 2009 CET | From | Rutanian Heritage Party | To | Debating the Media Information Act |
| Message | We acknowledge the arguments of the LDP and the OP, but we don't believe this matter can usefully be thought of as one about 'free-speech' - it is more a matter of libel, and the potential impact it can have. It's all well and good for individuals to make up their own minds when given information, whether true or false, but if this disinformation is extremely damaging to someone else, either financially, or in some other way that harms their reputation, it could have repurcussions well beyond what one individual thinks. If the media gives news that is patently false, with no real laws preventing them from doing so, the vast majority of people in Rutania will be inclined to believe what they read or hear - this disinformation could have an enormous flow-on effect. We believe, especially in the mass media's case, that there should at least be prohibitive fines for all falsehoods given. The current legislation could potentially be disasterous. We have decided to support this bill - although we fervently support the concept of free speech, this is one instance in which it is simply unfeasible. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes |
Total Seats: 126 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 149 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 30 |
| Random fact: The Real-Life Equivalents Index is a valuable resource for finding out the in-game equivalents of real-life cultures, languages, religions, people and places: http://forum.particracy.net/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=6731 |
| Random quote: "Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made" - Otto von Bismark |