Let’s talk about lying in politics
I’ve been watching with some dismay the reports of disinformation being spread about the recovery efforts to Hurricane Helene, wondering why the act of spreading materially deceptive, false information in politics is considered to be protected speech.
I mean, consider the parallels- if you lie to a customer in order to close a sale, it’s fraud- and a crime. But if you lie to the public in order to influence politics or to get them to take actions like giving you money, it’s… protected speech? Why?
I get it, regulating this sort of thing is hard, especially given that if our elected officials and justice system had precedent or the ability to regulate speech they didn’t like based on its content, the odds are likely 100% it would be abused in depraved ways. But, there are several scenarios where being truthful is the standard that differentiates protected from non-protected speech:
- It’s not fraud if the sales pitch was truthful
- It’s not slander or libel if the speech was truthful
- It’s not incitement to lawless action if there actually is a fire in the theatre — is it?
If being truthful or not materially deceptive is not too heavy a burden on commerce or other kinds of speech, why is it impracticable to hold political liars accountable when the lies they tell…
