Censorship not a solution

This doesn’t seem like a great idea

IN THE AGE of fake news, in which any yahoo can start a website and write stories nowhere near the territory of true, countries all around the world are trying to come up with different solutions. But Thailand’s seems to, uh, miss the mark.

Here’s what Daniela Flamini at Poynter wrote, about something the Thai authorities call their new Fake News Center: “Under this new entity, Thailand’s police forces will work with military and government officials to decide what pieces of content should or should not be shared on the Internet. In Burkina Faso, journalists can now be punished for publishing ‘fake news’ or ‘false information’ related to national security. A new law stipulated that reporters and editors can get 10 years in jail and a £7,000 fine if their work is considered misleading.” That sounds a bit authoritarian. A free people might prefer a more free-market solution to combat fake news. Such as organizations like Snopes and FactCheck.Org, which earn audience trust with a plain facts-only approach.

And newspapers that publish corrections when necessary.

Even the country of Oman, which you would expect to have a more authoritarian approach to news, instead decided to train communications departments in some government sectors on how to spot and react to rumors and hoaxes. In an even more enlightened country like the United Kingdom, the government decided to include anti-fake news curriculums in schools, which seems like a good lesson in civics.

But Thailand’s new Fake News Center sounds more like censorship under the guise of “fighting fake news.” If the United States tried to set up a government agency to say what could or couldn’t go on the Internet, we’d probably see a digital revolt. And maybe not just digital.

Americans would call it what it is: censorship.

Best of luck to our brothers- and sister-in-arms in the Thai media. With this new Fake News Center, you’re going to need it.