The problem with having a central authority that determines what is true and what is false is that the individual may eventually stop deciding for themselves what is true and what is false. I am more than capable of making decisions on my own when it comes to the Internet, and I don't need any elitist-style group to make my decisions for me. Here comes the question: Will website owners be forced to use such labeling on their sites? What if the system is not trusted? See the problem yet? It gets worse.
What about those who decide to question things like government policy? One commenter mentioned 9/11, and how they think that alternative perspectives are bunk, but one thing that isn't is how the rescue workers and first responders are being treated.... not very well at all. These same people are calling into question the EPA's statement that the air was safe to breath and the water was safe to drink. If a "truth-labeling" system were ran by those with less than honorable intentions, and most people were relying on said system too heavily, what would happen if said system were to say that the Feel Good Foundation was bogus and full of it? Do you see the problem yet?
And even if something could be seen as credible, like say.... an American Psychological Association publication that stated that Aspartame actually is linked to weight gain (doing this for illustration purposes), you would still have those who consume the product anyway and those who are opposed to criticism of the artificial sweetener would dismiss the group on their own, even if such a publication was already peer reviewed and considered valid in the academic community. In other words, the labeling system could in theory be ignored entirely and would also be a complete waste of time, unless it were to fall into the wrong hands...
If that were to happen, then entire populations of people could be conditioned (in theory) to think one way and only one way. The fact that people are free to question things, even if it seems absurd to do so at times, means that they are truly liberated and truly free. The day that asking questions lands you in prison is the day in which you are no longer considered free. In terms of freedom of thought, such a web labeling system would be the wrong direction to take. Encouragement of critical thinking is a better idea. Isn't it time for us to stop insulting our own intelligence and encourage ourselves to think for ourselves instead?
Slashdot Mirror
The problem with having a central authority that determines what is true and what is false is that the individual may eventually stop deciding for themselves what is true and what is false. I am more than capable of making decisions on my own when it comes to the Internet, and I don't need any elitist-style group to make my decisions for me. Here comes the question: Will website owners be forced to use such labeling on their sites? What if the system is not trusted? See the problem yet? It gets worse.
What about those who decide to question things like government policy? One commenter mentioned 9/11, and how they think that alternative perspectives are bunk, but one thing that isn't is how the rescue workers and first responders are being treated.... not very well at all. These same people are calling into question the EPA's statement that the air was safe to breath and the water was safe to drink. If a "truth-labeling" system were ran by those with less than honorable intentions, and most people were relying on said system too heavily, what would happen if said system were to say that the Feel Good Foundation was bogus and full of it? Do you see the problem yet?
And even if something could be seen as credible, like say.... an American Psychological Association publication that stated that Aspartame actually is linked to weight gain (doing this for illustration purposes), you would still have those who consume the product anyway and those who are opposed to criticism of the artificial sweetener would dismiss the group on their own, even if such a publication was already peer reviewed and considered valid in the academic community. In other words, the labeling system could in theory be ignored entirely and would also be a complete waste of time, unless it were to fall into the wrong hands...
If that were to happen, then entire populations of people could be conditioned (in theory) to think one way and only one way. The fact that people are free to question things, even if it seems absurd to do so at times, means that they are truly liberated and truly free. The day that asking questions lands you in prison is the day in which you are no longer considered free. In terms of freedom of thought, such a web labeling system would be the wrong direction to take. Encouragement of critical thinking is a better idea. Isn't it time for us to stop insulting our own intelligence and encourage ourselves to think for ourselves instead?