🇳🇱
Ok summit news is not a credible source of information. Low factual reporting. It’s even using totally ludicrous claims like “alphabet people” having special treatment from the state right in this article.
I am more than happy to agree with you here WRT to almost any media these days honestly with very few exceptions.
The question is, do you have a better source that explains the new law more accurately?
@freemo @waltercool From this free metro article. It seems that this law isn’t about vaccines at all, but rather as to ban content that can cause “likely psychological harm”
There are definitely legitimate concerns about what is “content that can cause psychological harm” and how it could be interpreted to silence people but this isn’t a “jail the anti vaxxers bill “
https://metro.co.uk/2021/11/01/online-trolls-to-be-jailed-if-they-cause-psychological-harm-15523621/
So I just found the full text of the bill and gave it a speed read. It makes no mention of vaccines anywhere in the bill, so you are correct:
With that said I would say that while the original article, as you pointed out, is incorrect, the truth of the matter is in fact **worse**. The scope is so much more general that not only could it be used to jail people for spreading misinformation but also for any number of ridiculous charges.
Its a absolutely horrific and scary bill no matter how you dice it by the looks of it.
@freemo @waltercool as I said there are legitimate concerns from what I see from the article about this bill. I did not claimed to know at what extent it is concerning.
I didnt mean to imply you said anything incorrect. I was just adding my two cents after a quick glance at the bill.
That part is enough to jail people who claim something different than government.
That law is making illegal and punishable any statement contrary to "official truth", online.
Actually the wording of the bill is even worse than that. It is illegal even if it is false and you as the author did not know it was false.
The criteria to violate this law is that the information you publish need be false and wreckless, which is way more broad than "knowingly".
Here is the exact text of the bill that covers this:
A person commits an offence if, in response to an information notice—
(a) the person provides or publishes information or produces a document,
(b) the information or document is false in a material respect, and
(c) at the time the person provides, publishes or produces it, the person
knows that it is false in a material respect **or is reckless** as to whether it
is false in a material respect.
The analysis from Paul Joseph Watson is correct, politicians made questioning a crime.
Original source from The Times: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trolls-will-be-jailed-for-psychological-harm-2dccb2cct