Lets take the recent debate on Reddit about banning subs that promote misinformation.
This was the original post from part of the community https://old.reddit.com//r/vaxxhappened/comments/pbe8nj/we_call_upon_reddit_to_take_action_against_the/
This was Reddit's initial response https://old.reddit.com//r/announcements/comments/pbmy5y/debate_dissent_and_protest_on_reddit/
Notice the title of "debate, dissent and protest". Can someone explain how fake news comes under debate dissent and protest?
Let me give examples:
1) "Lockdowns are not worth the costs" is an alternative opinion
2) "India charges WHO Scientist Soumya Swaminathan for Mass Murder" is fake news
https://hannenabintuherland.com/asia/india-charges-who-scientist-soumya-swaminathan-for-mass-murder-the-beginning-of-accountability/
The Indian bar association, a private entity filed a complaint about the WHO scientist, but that story has been changed by a lot of politically partisan outlets to mean the govt has charged/prosecuted the WHO scientist for it.
The fake story has been extremely popular on social media.
It's not an alternative opinion, a debate or discussion. It's just plain wrong but went very viral. Why are there objections to not have these kinds of stories spread on social media?
No one defends(with claims of free speech) about phishers scamming older people with lies about being a Nigerian prince etc. but why is there so much push back against actions on fake news?
Is it possible to cut down the worst examples of #2 without affecting actual alternative opinions like #1 ?