United Kingdom
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
view the rest of the comments
When anyone can say anything, those who yell loudest will drown out the others. That is definitely a problem. But more fundamentally, while differing opinions are useful on many issues, there are also many questions where one answer is right and another wrong. You cannot have people publicly saying that vaccines cause autism, or that deworming tablets can cure Covid-19. That stuff gets people killed.
Freedom of speech is a complicated thing, and a lot of peope have trouble understanding where the line is, even though it is fairly clear in principle.
Freedom of speech "ends" when that speech is a mechanism by which another crime is committed. It's not the words that are illegal. It's what the words bring into action.
If you offer to pay someone to kill your wife, you can't get off by claiming freedom of speech, because you're charged with conspiracy to commit murder.
If you lie about the terms of a contract, the crime is fraud, not speech.
If you yell "fire" in a theatre and people are hurt attempting to flee, the crime is inciting panic, not rhe word "fire."
Ideally, telling an angry mob to march on the capital and "fight like hell" to prevent the certification of an election is fomenting an insurrection, not speech.
Any speech can be construed as a mechanism by which another crime is committed. At that point, it's just semantics. Some countries hold that there is no absolute right to free speech. Others say there is, but that the speaker may commit other crimes in the process. As long as the result is the same, the distinction seems mostly academic.