[unknownaccount]

No but this still establishes a scary new precedent; that any podcaster/videomaker is now legally responsible for any illegal actions that their viewers commit on their own accord. I can imagine how this will result in people being scared to criticize any leader or person in power because their comment/video might inspire some crazy person to harass them for which they will be found legally responsible.

[helf]

Omg no it doesn’t. You know damn well that some random streamer or podcaster isn’t the same as some of these heavy hitters of insanity.

And even ignoring that then YES, YES they should be held accountable if they are knowingly spewing falsehoods and stirring up people and it causes shit like that.

“Free speech” != “I can be a total fuckwad and say whatever so want without any repercussions!”

[unknownaccount]

I dont think different standards should apply to someone just because they have a popular show.

Sue the individuals who actually committed the acts of harassment, not Alex Jones. The people actually responsible for the harassment are getting away with it unscathed here, while a performer is punished. This isnt justice.

[tptacek]

It's not a different standard for having a popular show. It's the same standard, scaled by the reach and impact of his show. It's like the difference between plowing into a crowd of people on a dirt bike and plowing into a crowd of people with a semi truck. And, I assure you, Alex Jones is culpable under US law for the harassment these parents endured, just as someone who destroys your professional reputation is culpable from the losses you endure when unrelated people incorrectly refuse to hire you.

[kaba0]

It’s like there is this wall between US people’s understanding of free speech and a usual EU residents’. The same way Holocaust denial should be punishable, there are sane rules that must be abided, otherwise only chaos ensues. It won’t take you down an Orwellian dystopia any time soon, if anything, allowing these criminals selling an alternative reality will.

[notacoward]

American right-wing authoritarians have a weird relationship with the slippery slope fallacy. On the one hand, holding someone accountable for making claims which they admitted they knew were false, leading to demonstrable harm to the victims' families, then failing even to comply with court procedure or instructions, is such a slippery slope that clearly the entire first amendment (which isn't even relevant in this case) at risk. See also: gun laws. On the other hand, draconian anti-abortion laws supposedly aren't a slippery slope at all, even though they have already resulted in thousands of women being denied life-saving medications for completely unrelated medical conditions. It's almost like the they're picking and choosing when to use these arguments (see also: originalism) based on something other than logic or morality.

What's really abhorrent is that people are invoking "freedom" (in this case of speech) to defend someone who is a major player in the movement toward authoritarian control over literally every part of our lives. If I hadn't lost all respect for such people decades ago, I certainly would now.

[dsfyu404ed]

>wall between US people’s understanding of free speech and a usual EU residents’

If the split so nicely mirrored political boundaries we wouldn't be having this discussion. We're having this discussion because incompatible ideologies are fighting for control of one country.