Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Social Networks News

New Turkey Law Mandates Jail Time for Spreading 'Disinformation' (bloomberg.com) 100

Posted by msmash from the new-lows dept.
Turkey criminalized the spread of what authorities describe as false information on digital platforms, giving the government new powers in the months remaining before elections. From a report: The measure, proposed by the governing AK Party and its nationalist ally MHP, is part of a broader "disinformation" law that was adopted by parliament on Thursday. It mandates a jail term of one to three years for users who share online content that contains "false information on the country's security, public order and overall welfare in an attempt to incite panic or fear." Media groups and opposition parties have decried the bill as censorship, seeing it as a move to stifle critics and journalists in the run-up to elections set for next year. "The crime is defined with rather vague and open-ended terms," said Mustafa Kuleli, vice president of the European Federation of Journalists. "It is not clear how prosecutors will take action against those who allegedly spread false information." Other articles in the law range from amendments to issuance of press cards to the procedure of correcting "false" information online.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Turkey Law Mandates Jail Time for Spreading 'Disinformation' More

New Turkey Law Mandates Jail Time for Spreading 'Disinformation'

Comments Filter:

  • who defines (Score:2, Redundant)

    by ganjadude ( 952775 )
    misinformation???

    • also known as "qui custodes custodies?"

    • Re:who defines (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Tokolosh ( 1256448 ) on Friday October 14, 2022 @11:50AM (#62966331)

      Once you've built the big machinery of political power, remember you won't always be the one to run it.

      P. J. O'Rourke

      • if you don't build it someone else will, and they'll use it against you. Think of government like a box of loaded rifles. You can ignore the box, but if you do somebody is gonna pick them up and use them to make you do what they say.

        The only option is to participate. You pick up your rifle and learn to use it. Or you cower in fear from bad men willing to do just that. You're call.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by lsllll ( 830002 )
      lol. Modded "redundant" and it's the first post. But the question still exists. Turkey has historically (even way before Erdogan) been very cruel and harsh to journalists and writers. Many have spent years in jail. Something like this just gives ammunition to the government to decide whom they want to jail.

    • Re:who defines (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jonwil ( 467024 ) on Friday October 14, 2022 @03:05PM (#62967013)

      Knowing the way the current Turkish leader does things, "misinformation" will likely mean (among other things) anything that gives the current government a reason to arrest opposition politicians and keep them from winning seats.
      Or anything that makes the Kurds seem like anything other than evil terrorists that make ISIS look like saints by comparison.

    • The fucking subject and the summary both say "disinformation", so where are you getting "misinformation" from? Disinformation is the deliberate dissemination of something you already know is false. Compared to misinformation which is just anything demonstrably false, even if you don't know better. So all the government has to do is prove you knew something was false but continued to spread lies anyway. It's not the government who decides what the truth is, but the people doing the lying themselves.
      Not tha
    • Common sense. Or, perhaps scientific, empirical proof.

      FACTS are FACTS. Period.
      Opinions and beliefs are just that - BELIEFS. Once proven as immutable fact with blatant evidence, it becomes FACT.
      And any "alternative" fact is still NOT a fact; rather a belief or opinion.

      Misinformation is claiming something unproven, and reasonably doubtful, as a fact.
      This is an opinion, not reliable FACTual info.
      e.g. Extensive investigations have found no evidence that the 2020 US Presidential election was rigged or ta

  • That's a great idea. Now I'm sure that the government in power will refine everything such that they themselves can't simply use it as a blunt instrument to stomp out dissention.

  • Türkiye (Score:4, Funny)

    by TwistedGreen ( 80055 ) on Friday October 14, 2022 @11:16AM (#62966183)
    I thought you're supposed to call it Türkiye now. 3 years in prison for you!

    • Wait, WTF? The heading support unicode but the post doesn't?

      • I think it escapes it as HTML but doesn't render the escaped characters in the body.

        Weird, eh...

        It's not even unicode, since ü is in the extended ascii character set. (Alt-129)

        Türkiye

  • Is an opposing party's platform disinformation? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by chas.williams ( 6256556 ) on Friday October 14, 2022 @11:26AM (#62966231)
    Asking for a friend.

  • Because no religious text is true.

  • At least they and Paypal* are finally in synch now!

    *(and FB, and youtube, and twitter, and the White House...)

    • At least they and Paypal* are finally in synch now!

      *(and FB, and youtube, and twitter, and the White House...)

      Several other governments are headed that way too, and of course, loads of businesses, especially the social networks. And the governments aren't necessarily the usual suspects... the North Koreas, the Irans, etc. Many of them are "free" nations in the EU looking at this stuff. Canada as well.

      In terms of corporate punishment for "misinformation", we've already seen YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, etc do this. And I don't want to hear "Private companies yadda yadda". The same people defending Twitter et. al. all

  • They've already criminalized "medical misinformation" by health workers, defined in the law as merely any deviation from prevailing consensus among practitioners. Why not extend it to everyone?

    How about criminalizing climate and energy misinformation, defined as anything that pokes holes in the idea that electric cars, powered by solar panels and wind turbines alone, are a viable replacement for gasoline and diesel powered vehicles?

    How about criminalizing racist misinformation, defined as deviations from th

    • How about you have your first hissyfit of the day?

      • His grand kids were playing with the tv remote and he couldn't figure out how to change the channel back to Fox this morning.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by tragedy ( 27079 )

      They've already criminalized "medical misinformation" by health workers, defined in the law as merely any deviation from prevailing consensus among practitioners.

      I think you may actually be describing fraud there. You'd have to be a bit more specific (and possibly a bit more honest in your description of the definition) to say for sure.

      How about criminalizing climate and energy misinformation, defined as anything that pokes holes in the idea that electric cars, powered by solar panels and wind turbines alone, are a viable replacement for gasoline and diesel powered vehicles?

      Where it's fraud, it's kind of already illegal. For example, providing misinformation to regulators about things such as the emissions your vehicles produce if you're a car company is fraud. Car companies have done that. Providing misinformation about how much methane you're releasing directly into the atmosphere to government regulat

    • Problem is, the same health information would get you into trouble either in California or in Florida, but only one. Which one depends on the information. Vaccine good - jail in Florida. Vaccine bad - jail in California.

  • California is on the same road (Score:4, Insightful)

    by schwit1 ( 797399 ) on Friday October 14, 2022 @11:41AM (#62966293)

    https://nypost.com/2022/10/10/... [nypost.com]

    Gov. Gavin Newsom recently signed California Assembly Bill 2098, making it the first state to attempt to censor what physicians can say about COVID-19 to their patients.

    The statute instructs that “It shall constitute unprofessional conduct for a physician and surgeon to disseminate misinformation or disinformation related to COVID-19, including false or misleading information regarding the nature and risks of the virus, its prevention and treatment; and the development, safety, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines.”

    California law requires the Medical Board of California to take action — up to and including license revocation — against any licensed physician charged with unprofessional conduct.

    • Re:California is on the same road (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Friday October 14, 2022 @12:11PM (#62966401)

      A law saying doctors must give accurate and factual medical information?
      clutches pearls

      • If medical professionals can't inform their patients about the dangers of sex with demons without risking their medical license, then we may as well give the country back to King Charles!

      • A law saying doctors must give accurate and factual medical information? clutches pearls

        Except, you mouth-breathing 'tard, our information on COVID was constantly evolving. What we all assumed to be true on one day was quite often changed the next.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by taustin ( 171655 )

          And let's not forget, even such universally recognized authorities on the subject like attention whore Fauci have publicly admitted to lying.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by lsllll ( 830002 )
        The Kool-aid is strong in this one. Perhaps what someone wants you to consider "fact" is not what you may consider as fact. I go to a doctor for the doctor's opinion. That's why people get 2nd opinions. If the doctor is not allowed to give me her opinion, then we're all fucked.
    • They don't call him Governor Gruesome for nothing.

    • Re:California is on the same road (Score:5, Insightful)

      by splutty ( 43475 ) on Friday October 14, 2022 @12:51PM (#62966531)

      A doctor has a license. If a doctor is unable to refrain from spouting medical nonsense, their license gets revoked.

      Seems pretty clear cut to me. Your suggestion this has anything at all to do with censorship is utterly delusional.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ljw1004 ( 764174 )

        A doctor has a license. If a doctor is unable to refrain from spouting medical nonsense, their license gets revoked. Seems pretty clear cut to me. Your suggestion this has anything at all to do with censorship is utterly delusional.

        I think it's more nuanced than what you describe. Originally doctors were unlicensed, and anyone could call themselves doctors, and many quacks did. There was lots of quackery. The government started to regulate them. The doctors formed their own self-regulating professional body and made a deal with the authorities: "you trust us to keep our house in order, and we will, and you don't need to do further regulation or micro-managing". That model had been universally adopted.

        When a profession fails to uphold

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by lsllll ( 830002 )
        Medicine is not exact science. What you consider "spouting medical nonsense" is an opinion. If you think the opinion is dubious, you get a second one. If doctors aren't allowed to give opinions, well, then you may be better going to one of those future "Google AI" doctors which are right around the corner.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by splutty ( 43475 )

          Bullshit. None of the specifically mentioned things in that article are in any way, shape, or form "Opinions".

          If your "Opinion" is that vaccines don't work, you need to not be a doctor.

          • Bullshit. None of the specifically mentioned things in that article are in any way, shape, or form "Opinions".

            If your "Opinion" is that vaccines don't work, you need to not be a doctor.

            You're incorrect.

            At first, it was '2 weeks to stop the spread', and 2 years later, we're still suffering.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by lsllll ( 830002 )

            I read the actual text of the bill [ca.gov]. The only part I have an issue with is 2270.4: "“Misinformation” means false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus contrary to the standard of care."

            That could directly contradict with the Hippocratic Oath [wikipedia.org] and also pegs the physician against a moving target when it comes to things like COVID-19, especially during the early stages. We all know how many times CDC and WHO (wouldn't that be considered "the concensus"?) flip flopped

            • "Contrary to the standard of care" is a phrase that is used in malpractice lawsuits. It is BAD behavior in the medical community.

              As for "pegging a physician against a moving target" that is how it works -doctors are expected to keep up with current medical knowledge. It is just part of the job. Especially so when the information is in flux -they should know it is in flux, and read the updates being passed along by the AMA.

              Researchers question, and develop new theories and treatments.
              Attending physicians

        • Medicine is not exact science.

          Science not being exact does not make someone unprofessional. Science showing something to be wrong beyond any reasonable doubt or claims of "inexactness", and yet you doing it anyway makes someone unprofessional.

          Don't hide dangerous quacks beyond "it's not exact science".

    • COVID was pretty basic science and sad how poor our science education is. If you think they should have had consistent simple messaging and immediately know 100% correct answers from the start then you're part of the problem. Especially if you are in IT and have done troubleshooting, you should know better.

      Incompetent Doctors need to be banned. Doctors already kill and maim way more people than cars kill every year - and those are not all incompetent doctors making those mistakes. Human error plays a big p

      • Or better yet maybe the doctor youre visiting didnt need all the extra years of training because they were pushed through by the administration in the name of "diversity" or some other meritless reason.
         
        Good times

      • Elements of COVID were pretty basic. But I think that taken as a whole it was a horrifically complex problem. It's easy enough to determine things in carefully controlled environments. But needing to anticipate the behavior of a huge population who are often performing very different actions to what they report can be insidiously difficult. You can easily determine the effectiveness of X when variables Y and Z are introduced in a controlled environment. But it gets a lot harder when people bring along a tho
    • I know people who have been advised by a doctor in the family who has advised against taking the COVID vaccine. There are limits to freedom of speech, e.g. yelling fire in a theater.

      This isn't the same thing as stating an unpopular political opinion that is punishable by the government.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tragedy ( 27079 )

      That's a tricky one. Should a doctor be able to keep their license to practice medicine in a state if they tell their patients that disease is caused by dream sex with witches and demons? Or how about if they tell people that cancer is caused by subluxations of the spine and that Western medicine is useless against it and that the only fixes are chiropractic manipulation of the spine or acupuncture? Or, possibly, taking some of the cancer and repeatedly diluting it in a large amount of water and finally giv

    • Ludicrously so. The right wing talks a good game but when they get in power they crack down hard on free speech. Take Truth Social, where you'll get banned for talking positively about democrats.

      Now onto the points in the article you linked. This is nothing new. Quack doctors lose their licenses all the time. All the bill does is clarify existing law that says if you tell a patient something that has zero scientific backing and you keep doing it knowingly then you're going to lose your license. Again, n

    • California law requires the Medical Board of California to take action — up to and including license revocation — against any licensed physician charged with unprofessional conduct.

      Wait, are you surprised by this? Are you suggesting you live in a place where medical professionals do not have their license revoked when charged with unprofessional conduct? That's ... the law in every western country.

    • Doctors can still recommend patients not get the vaccine, "I believe the approval process was rushed" would be a a perfectly good reason to give. Completely false information such as "it is no more dangerous than the flue," "you are immune if you already had the virus", "it will make you sterile" are the sort of false information disguised as a genuine opinion that is not allowed.

  • How can the public be so dimwitted as to tolerate something so blatantly stupid? Imagine there is a website that keeps popping up a notice to subscribe to their Daily News, would anyone be fool enough to go back to such a site? That's the level of stupidity I am talking about.

    • How can the public be so dimwitted as to tolerate something so blatantly stupid?

      We're talking about Turkey here. And while Turks are not Islamist to the extent that, say, the Saudis or Iranians are, Islam is a very important part of their identity. Kemal Ataturk failed in secularizing the Turks. They remain deeply religious. And Erdogan, despite some missteps, still has the support of most Turks, especially those outside of the more cosmopolitan centers like Istanbul. That makes it easy to protect the "honor" of Turkey.

  • Does that mean I go to jail when I call Erdogan a âzsmart guyâoe? Itâs apparently a disinformation. And if I tell the truth and call him an idiot, I go to jail because of Betrayal of a state secret?

  • I'm not shocked since that liberal moron in New Zealand is now wanting to put cows in chambers and tax them for farts. She's also pushed anti-free speech rhetoric, especially at the UN. [nypost.com]

    Back to the Turks..

    How soon they forget the widespread torturing of political prisoners [info-turk.be] and other extreme acts by the Turkish gov't.

    Free Speech is a human right.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Whibla ( 210729 )

      I'm not shocked since that liberal moron ... also pushed anti-free speech rhetoric, especially at the UN. [nypost.com]

      Well that's a rather simplistic take on what she said, completely ignoring the context. Her argument seemed rather more about amplification and spread of misinformation and propaganda, rather than saying people shouldn't be allowed to share their views. And the simple fact is, propaganda is a weapon of war, a tool used by governments, authoritarian or otherwise, to influence populations. To a degree it's fine when one does it to their own citizens,' after all if I elected them I'm giving them the power, and

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tragedy ( 27079 )

      I'm not shocked since that liberal moron in New Zealand is now wanting to put cows in chambers and tax them for farts. She's also pushed anti-free speech rhetoric, especially at the UN. [nypost.com]

      Oh yeah, because saying that the way speech works online and is manipulated by algorithms and curation should be studied and understood is anti-free speech. Isn't that more or less the same thing that Republicans are doing when they call moderation "cancel culture"?

      As for the methane emissions thing, do you actually think that she wants to put cows in chambers? Seriously, are you just being ridiculously hyperbolic, or do you actually believe that? I can never really tell with US right wing types. You might

    • Yeah I'm not surprised that's the take you have on it when you read NY Post articles. When you're ready to drop off the rage bandwagon you can go read a reputable account of what was said and realise she wasn't pushing any anti-free speech, but rather commenting on the use of algorithms to promote misinformation, something which objectively is happening right now.

      Come back to reality man. What you're doing isn't healthy.

  • "This is outrageous. Where are the armed men who come in to take the protestors away? Where are they? This kind of behavior is never tolerated in Baraqua. You shout like that they put you in jail. Right away. No trial, no nothing. Journalists, we have a special jail for journalists. You are stealing: right to jail. You are playing music too loud: right to jail, right away. Driving too fast: jail. Slow: jail. You are charging too high prices for sweaters, glasses: you right to jail. You undercook fish? Belie
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • ...is going to be dead in Turkey.
  • what authorities describe as false information on digital platforms Of course they don't have freedom of speech/expression over there, but who says what someone says is misinformation? When GOVERNMENT controls speech, you have NO freedom. Let people make the decision.
  • Since when do Turkeys make laws? They'll be voting for Christmas next
  • If you speak against Tayyi Erdogan, it is always false information, regardless you tell the truth 100 with irrefutable proof. If you call Tayyip's cohortsd thieves and scheemers, again false information. This is not any different than Biden's fact check police which was abandoned. It is a muzzle on free speech. And people who want to puth the kibosh on free speech are NEVER the good ones. History tells us.

  • Just in time for Thanksgiving, too.

Slashdot Top Deals

Don't panic.

Close