[gwright]

> Misrepresented ideas

The notion that "misrepresenting ideas" is a form of "misinformation" is chilling. It suggests that there is some privileged point of view regarding any given idea and that anything that contradicts that point of view is "misinformation".

Exactly how do you propose to determine what the correct representation is for any particular idea? Isn't it possible that some ideas are not credible and that criticism of them is legitimate? How do you propose to evaluate new ideas if they can't withstand criticism and competing ideas?

It is awfully convenient to be able to tag criticism of your ideas as "misrepresentation" and therefore "misinformation". It is just one step further to regulate the means of communication so that "misinformation" is prohibited, blocked, etc.

Ideas that can't be defended on their own merits but instead are perpetuated by ignoring, blocking, censuring, or disparaging competing ideas don't seem particularly sturdy to me.

[trasz]

It’s not about criticism and competing ideas, it’s about trying to force a definition of idea different from what it actually is.