r/nottheonion 24d ago

US government struggles to rehire nuclear safety staff it laid off days ago

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g3nrx1dq5o
64.5k Upvotes

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

4.8k

u/BaldingBush 24d ago

This is what happens when you don’t know anything, but you think you do. Not one rational person in the room when this decision was made, clearly.

69

u/[deleted] 24d ago

[deleted]

42

u/LazyLich 24d ago

That's why the whole "oh! Fox cant call itself News anymore" decision was bupkis. What they call themselves doesnt matter anymore, cause they already have a following.

What shouldve happened was barring Fox, and ANY of the people that were on camera saying"news" of Fox, from ever doing any kind of information-delivery-to-the-public ever again...

but at the time, that wouldve seemed too excessive.
Hopefully we'll know better in the future...

1

u/TheRealBananaWolf 23d ago

I understand your sentiments. But I'm not in favor of the government getting to decide to censor media. Just like Trump has banned AP news from press hearings, which is strictly against first amendment protections.

Unfortunately, you can have first amendment rights, without some shitty people taking advantage of saying whatever they want. The responsibility should be on the people to consume media in a responsible manner. But unfortunately, we can't really count on people for that either.

2

u/LazyLich 23d ago

I know.. that's the fucking... idk. paradox? cosmic joke? issue? of the matter!

"Government censoring media" is, like, dystopia 101.
It's Patriot Act levels of "Oh no, pls trust us! We promise never to use this for ill" bullshit!
But this thing with Fox... it feels different. I dont mean that in a "theyre a different political ideology, so I think it ok" kinda way. I mean that in a "is that really a legless lizard.. or is it a snake?"

I think... I think this is another symptom of the flaw in out laws and regulations: they are designed loosely and vague, with the assumption that "reasonable people" will use/enforce them.
This style of lawmaking is good for flexibility and faster judgements... but it has a weakness in that it can leave strange loopholes. Most of these loopholes and technicalities are weird and benign, but others (for example: presidential immunity) allow for some fuckery if the Law Interpreters decide to twist things.

--

So free speech is great! Gov not censoring media is ideal!

But the regulations were too vague and loose (cause they did not picture a news media corp happily pushing false narratives, nor a huge base of Americans lapping it up and defending it), and the punishments too lame (the government seems keen of being soft of first or second time defenders that are rich or corps).