scholarly journals Making the ‘Harm Principle’ Central to Approaches Against Information Disorder

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Uyiosa Omoregie
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Systems Approach ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Harm Principle ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Global Challenge ◽  
Cass Sunstein ◽  
Definition Of Information ◽  
Complex Phenomena ◽  
The Harm Principle

Misinformation online is an urgent global challenge. Such is the gravity of the challenge, and its effect on global collective behaviour, there are calls for social media/information disorder to be designated a “crisis discipline” along with medicine, conservation biology and climate science. Scholars have generally settled for a definition of ‘information disorder’ that reveals three variants: misinformation, disinformation and malinformation. What should be of paramount importance, in the fight against information disorder, is the potential of falsehood to cause harm. This potential for harm must be the litmus test distinguishing free speech and speech that should not be free. The ‘harm principle’ proposed by John Stuart Mill is more than 150 years old and needs an upgrade for the social media age. One such upgrade is proposed by Cass Sunstein. We summarize different approaches to analysing online information disorder. We conclude that approaches which emphasize analytical and critical thinking are important but have shortcomings. When analysing complex phenomena like conspiracy theories a ‘systems’ approach is more effective to reveal root causes of information disorder, provide actionable insight and long-term solutions.

scholarly journals The ‘Harm Principle’ and Information Disorder Online

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Uyiosa Omoregie
Keyword(s):  
John Stuart Mill ◽  
Harm Principle ◽  
False Information ◽  
Current Form ◽  
The Social ◽  
Cass Sunstein ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Definition Of Information ◽  
British Philosopher ◽  
The Harm Principle

Misinformation propagation in its current form is a global problem that requires urgent solutions. Historically, instances of misinformation publicly propagated can be found as far back as the sixth century AD.Scholars and researchers have generally settled for a definition of ‘information disorder’ that reveals three variants: misinformation, disinformation and malinformation. What should be of paramount importance, in the fight against information disorders, is the potential of false information to cause harm. The ‘harm principle’ was proposed by the British philosopher John Stuart Mill in 1859 and needs an upgrade for the social media age. One such upgrade is proposed by Cass Sunstein.

scholarly journals Some Approaches in Online Misinformation Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Uyiosa Omoregie
Keyword(s):  
Opposite Effect ◽  
Systems Approach ◽  
False Belief ◽  
Complex Nature ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Conspiracy Theories ◽  
Fact Checking ◽  
Change Beliefs ◽  
Complex Phenomena

The complex nature of the ‘infodemic’ problem requires a combination of different approaches to analysing online information disorder. Approaches which emphasize analytical and critical thinking are important but have shortcomings. Fact-checking as a misinformation prevention strategy also has limitations. Certain types of misinformation disorder are complex and providing ‘facts’ alone may not change beliefs in adherents, particularly when deeply-held beliefs are involved. Sometimes the opposite effect of strengthening the false belief occurs. This has led to the strategy of trying to prevent or neutralize misinformation through ‘inoculation’ or ‘prebunking’ . Prebunking or inoculation involves exposing the flawed argumentation techniques of misinformation to prepare online content consumers against future misinformation. For analysing complex phenomena like conspiracy theories a ‘systems’ approach is more effective to reveal root causes of information disorder, provide actionable insight and long-term solutions.

The Limits of Criminal Misconduct

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Horder
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Role Theory ◽  
Codes Of Conduct ◽  
Harm Principle ◽  
Moral Justification ◽  
Public Office ◽  
The Harm Principle

I turn my attention to the theoretical or moral justification for the offence of misconduct in public office. I argue that the offence of misconduct in office is only tenuously connected to the ‘harm principle’ justification for criminalization. I suggest that the offence is better explained by what I call the ‘role’ theory of criminalization. I also consider the legitimate scope of the offence: the kinds of misconduct that it should, and should not, cover. In that regard, we will see that codes of conduct that govern officials—a vital written element to the UK’s constitution—play a role not merely in setting boundaries but also in minimizing rule of law uncertainty about the kind of misconduct that may be found to fall within the scope of the offence.

scholarly journals Toleration as the Balance Between Liberty and Security

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Elisabetta Galeotti ◽  
Federica Liveriero
Keyword(s):  
Social Security ◽  
Harm Principle ◽  
Social Tolerance ◽  
Individual Liberty ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Harm Principle

AbstractTraditionally, an adequate strategy to deal with the tension between liberty and security has been toleration, for the latter allows the maximization of individual liberty without endangering security, since it embraces the limits set by the harm principle and the principle of self-defense of the liberal order. The area outside the boundary clearly requires repressive measures to protect the security and the rights of all. In this paper, we focus on the balance of liberty and security afforded by toleration, analyzing how this strategy works in highly conflictual contexts and sorting out the different sets of reason that might motivate individual to assume a tolerant attitude. We contend that toleration represents a reliable political solution to conflicts potentially threatening social security when it is coupled with social tolerance. Hence, we examine the reasons the agents may have for endorsing toleration despite disagreement and disapproval. In the range of these reasons, we argue that the right reasons are those preserving the moral and epistemic integrity of the agent. The right reasons are however not accessible to everyone, as for example is the case with (non-violent) religious fundamentalists. Only prudential reasons for toleration seem to be available to them. And yet, we argue that an open and inclusive democracy should in principle be hospitable towards prudential and pragmatic reasons as well, which may potentially lay the grounds for future cooperation. We conclude therefore that the tolerant society has room for the fundamentalists, granted that they do not resort to violence.

From the harm principle to harm decisionism: Hart, Feinberg, and the eclipse of Millian ambiguity

2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-211
Author(s):  
Bernard E. Harcourt
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Harm Principle ◽  
Simple Sentence ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
The Harm Principle

This simple sentence from John Stuart Mill’s “Introductory” to On Liberty—pulled out of context and denuded of Mill’s sophisticated philosophical treatment—became a foundational reference of Anglo-American criminal law and helped shape the course of penal legislation, enforcement, and theory during the twenteith century.

scholarly journals The harm principle and the greatest happiness principle: the missing link

2014 ◽  
Vol 55 (129) ◽  
pp. 99-110
Author(s):  
Cinara Nahra
Keyword(s):  
Harm Principle ◽  
The Self ◽  
The Other ◽  
Missing Link ◽  
Prudential Value ◽  
Classic Problem ◽  
Other Regarding ◽  
Legal Force ◽  
The Harm Principle

In this article I present a possible solution for the classic problem of the apparent incompatibility between Mill's Greatest Happiness Principle and his Principle of Liberty arguing that in the other-regarding sphere the judgments of experience and knowledge accumulated through history have moral and legal force, whilst in the self-regarding sphere the judgments of the experienced people only have prudential value and the reason for this is the idea according to which each of us is a better judge than anyone else to decide what causes us pain and which kind of pleasure we prefer (the so-called epistemological argument). Considering that the Greatest Happiness Principle is nothing but the aggregate of each person's happiness, given the epistemological claim we conclude that, by leaving people free even to cause harm to themselves, we still would be maximizing happiness, so both principles (the Greatest Happiness Principle and the Principle of Liberty) could be compatible.

Attributions for Inconsistencies Between Online and Offline Self-Presentations

2011 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 805-825 ◽  
Author(s):  
David C. DeAndrea ◽  
Joseph B. Walther
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Sense Of Self ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Interpersonal Interactions ◽  
Online Behavior ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Self Presentations ◽  
Interpersonal Impressions

This study investigated how people make sense of self-portrayals in social media that are inconsistent with impressions formed through other interpersonal interactions. The research focused on how inconsistent online information affects interpersonal impressions and how motivation to manage impressions influences the types of attributions that actors and observers make for the misleading online behavior. Results show that the relationship between observer and the target influences evaluations of online/offline inconsistencies: Subjects rated the inconsistencies of acquaintances as more intentionally misleading, more hypocritical, and less trustworthy relative to the inconsistencies of friends. In addition, the types of attributions people made for online behavior depended on the perspective of the person providing the explanation: People explained their own online behavior more favorably than the online behavior of both friends and acquaintances.

scholarly journals THE ROLE OF INSTAGRAM AS AN INFORMATION DELIVERANCE TO THE CITIZEN BY THE PUBLIC RELATIONS OF SALATIGA CITY GOVERNMENT

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 111
Author(s):  
Silvia Widya Kusumaningtyas ◽  
Zon Vanel
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Public Relations ◽  
Active Role ◽  
City Government ◽  
Online Information ◽  
The Public ◽  
Information Media ◽  
Government Public Relations ◽  
The Government

<span lang="IN">Social media is one type of new media that facilitates the process of communication among human. Social media makes it easy for users to communicate and share information in a wider range. At present, not only people use Instagram, but the government also needs to keep up with the time to participate in using Instagram as an online information media. Public Relations of the Salatiga Government is one of the public relations departments that uses Instagram as an online information media to provide information needed by the community.<br /> This research aimed to find out how the content of the information was<span>  </span>and how the role of instagram was as an information deliverance to the citizen by the public relations of Salatiga. Through qualitative methods research, data is collected by means of interviews and observations. The results showed that the Salatiga <span> </span>Government Public Relations Instagram account had a role to increase brand awareness, connect many people and as a source of information/ business promotion.Public Relations of the Salatiga Government considers that Instagram plays an active role in conveying information to the public. This is seen from the many positive responses received by the Salatiga City Government Public Relations during managing Instagram as a modern information deliverance.<span>     </span></span>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document