Does *anybody* have any issues with this?

If it's blatant disinformation, lies or libel, the White House has a right to 'ask' people to stop doing it.

*edit* It's a passive request on the White House website. It's not like he's sending out the information police (yet).

I don't know if this qualifies.

I got an email from one of my Republican friends that said Obama was going to solve the senior health crisis by offering Cash for Cadavers.

Apparently he is going to solve the homeless problem with a new program called "Dollars For Derelicts.

Although I guess some of us old timers might have qualified under the Cash for Clunkers program.

I have a problem with it.

1. I'm pretty sure you can't commit "libel" against our government. No worries there.

2. Our government has better things to do than monitor what's essentially a giant game of telephone.

3.It is up to each individual US citizen to decide what they believe about our government's policy.

4. I don't want my government to decide for me what is "disinformation"

5. I don't want to live in a police state

I'm sure there's more....

You're right, you can't libel or slander a government (in America). Public figures don't have much libel protection, and a nonentity like "government" wouldn't be able to sue.

That doesn't mean outright lies are good, either.

Maybe, but staying in tune with what the people are thinking is a big part of American democracy. That said, the Internet is the current communications powerhouse... so paying attention to the information online IS important to the government. If information online is misleading people, causing voters to vote against White House policies, it would behoove the White House to pay attention to a) what those messages are, b) who is sending them, c) what threat they represent, and d) who is receiving these messages.

Sure, but in an information fight, it's up to each side to find out what the other side is distributing.
Conveniently, they aren't. They are asking you to decide, and then to submit it. They aren't planning on arresting people for it (which would be illegal to do) but knowing about it is totally legal.
Good, you aren't. Neither are you necessarily on the road to one. Isn't that happy?

I got an email yesterday from a lobbying group that frequently referenced Hitler and Stalin and said that putting health clinics in our schools would be done "to brainwash our children!" ... It also said the plan would explicitly euthanize the elderly.

That pretty much counts as disinformation, don't you think? Ridiculous, but persuasive, disinformation.

Blog text from the horse's mouth.

"If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like." ~Noam Chomsky

Right. Freedom of speech allows you to say almost anything.

Wouldn't you like to know how much of that speech is pure bulls**t?

Like this one pehaps? Sure... I'd like to know.

But we're not talking about curbing freedom of speech here. We're talking about tracking misinformation.

The *SECOND* the government tells someone they *can't* say something, I'll be the first person on my roof with a burning pitchfork.


...well, I'm in Canada, but if I was down there I'd be the first person.

Government (either party) tracking information that they feel is not favourable to them concerns me. Period.

As it did Milton in his writing: THE AREOPAGITICA

It's not the info they will be tracking, It will be the people putting it out.

Would you like future programs to be decided by misinformation?

There are way too many people who will believe anything they read on the internet no matter how wild and seemingly unbelievable it may be. I don't have any problem with an attempt to sort out the blatent Bulls**t regardless of party.

(You don't really want to get into swapping soundbites of politicians over the past 8 years do you?)

Unless I woke up in China this morning... It's not my governments' place to censor ANY information because they feel it's not in their best interest.

(And nope, I'm not interested in soundbite swapping... my candidate, unfortunately, wasn't elected to office 4 or ,for that matter 8 yrs ago.)

But please... feel free be okay with it.
That's what sets our country apart from some others... we both are FREE to choose. :)

Censor?!


Think of it this way then- the government spends $billions getting messages out there. That's *YOUR* tax payers dollars. The more MISinformation the cheaper the delivery.

We're not talking about opinion here either. It's not a case of someone saying, "I don't like Obama's stance on XYZ." It's a case of someone calling XYZ "KFL".

I'm picturing u on your roof! ;)

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around a burning pitchfork. So are the tines themselves burning, or are you holding burning hay with the pitchfork. And wouldn't it be dangerous to be holding a pitchfork with burning hay on top or your house, you could fall or something.

Also, freedom of speech goood...believing everything you hear, baaaad.

And people called me a conspiracy theorist..... bye-bye freedom!

I just would rather third parties, like Snopes, handle the whole misinformation thing. Wouldn't you?

If the government isn't able to get a hold of the bunk information that is out there without soliciting private citizens, then they must not be near as powerful as I thought.

"programs" are decided by the house and senate. So, it's good that they decided to *read* the HC proposal before just passing it (ie the bailout) and keep their fingers crossed.

The administration's call for flags on "misinformation" is a campaign to strengthen their OWN stance. Not to help us dum ol americans unnerstan better. duh huh!

So, now we're all *debating* the health care reform, and it's taking a long time to iron out. GOOD! Keep talking people. Spout off any opinion you'd like. Even if it's misguided. That's how we come to an agreement.

If I have an opinion, I don't need the gov to reexplain it to me so that I better understand my misguidedness. God and politics. Geesh. My opinion is MINE. Thx.

I have edited the title and description as they both contained some very misleading lies.

Lets be clear here. There is no website. Nobody is talking about censoring anything. Nobody is talking about tracking "people" in any way.

Here is the ENTIRE quote from the white house blog that the article refers to:

Heehee... Now the title sounds like a wedding invitation :)

"The White House requests the honour of your emails regarding rumors and disinformation. Please RSVP any and all correspondence received and/or found to flag@whitehouse.gov."

:P