672 lines
76 KiB
HTML
672 lines
76 KiB
HTML
<!DOCTYPE html>
|
||
<html lang="" xml:lang="" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head>
|
||
<meta charset="utf-8"/>
|
||
<meta content="pandoc" name="generator"/>
|
||
<meta content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0, user-scalable=yes" name="viewport"/>
|
||
<title>20 April, 2021</title>
|
||
<style type="text/css">
|
||
code{white-space: pre-wrap;}
|
||
span.smallcaps{font-variant: small-caps;}
|
||
span.underline{text-decoration: underline;}
|
||
div.column{display: inline-block; vertical-align: top; width: 50%;}
|
||
</style>
|
||
<title>Daily-Dose</title><meta content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0" name="viewport"/><link href="styles/simple.css" rel="stylesheet"/><link href="../styles/simple.css" rel="stylesheet"/><style>*{overflow-x:hidden;}</style><link href="https://unpkg.com/aos@2.3.1/dist/aos.css" rel="stylesheet"/><script src="https://unpkg.com/aos@2.3.1/dist/aos.js"></script></head>
|
||
<body>
|
||
<h1 data-aos="fade-down" id="daily-dose">Daily-Dose</h1>
|
||
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" data-aos-anchor-placement="top-bottom" id="contents">Contents</h1>
|
||
<ul>
|
||
<li><a href="#from-new-yorker">From New Yorker</a></li>
|
||
<li><a href="#from-vox">From Vox</a></li>
|
||
<li><a href="#from-the-hindu-sports">From The Hindu: Sports</a></li>
|
||
<li><a href="#from-the-hindu-national-news">From The Hindu: National News</a></li>
|
||
<li><a href="#from-bbc-europe">From BBC: Europe</a></li>
|
||
<li><a href="#from-ars-technica">From Ars Technica</a></li>
|
||
<li><a href="#from-jokes-subreddit">From Jokes Subreddit</a></li>
|
||
</ul>
|
||
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-new-yorker">From New Yorker</h1>
|
||
<ul>
|
||
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Andrew Cuomo, Matt Gaetz, and the New “Never Resign” School of Politics</strong> - In recent years, many politicians have seemed to realize that remaining in office is often the best path out of a scandal—for their own sake if no one else’s. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-local-correspondents/andrew-cuomo-matt-gaetz-and-the-new-never-resign-school-of-politics">link</a></p></li>
|
||
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>The Georgia Voting Law and the End of the New South</strong> - Republican state legislators once were allies of the business establishment. Now they seem to have little use for it. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-populism/the-georgia-voting-law-and-the-end-of-the-new-south">link</a></p></li>
|
||
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Biden Finally Got to Say No to the Generals</strong> - Critics be damned, the President is ending the Forever War waged by Bush, Obama, and Trump in Afghanistan. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-bidens-washington/biden-finally-got-to-say-no-to-the-generals">link</a></p></li>
|
||
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>How COVID-19 Surged Again in India</strong> - A conversation about the crisis in Mumbai and the risks of rapid reopening. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/how-covid-19-surged-again-in-india">link</a></p></li>
|
||
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>A Doctor’s Dark Year</strong> - In the heart of the pandemic, a trauma surgeon travels to the edge and back. - <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/science/medical-dispatch/a-doctors-dark-year">link</a></p></li>
|
||
</ul>
|
||
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-vox">From Vox</h1>
|
||
<ul>
|
||
<li><strong>The First Amendment has a Facebook problem</strong> -
|
||
<figure>
|
||
<img alt="Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg sitting at a desk and wearing a suit and tie for his testimony before Congress in 2018. The room behind him is packed with seated people." src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/9_fgr_ONZ5PQPC0qz-OLOLpNENM=/506x0:4550x3033/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/69155155/947025224.jpg.0.jpg"/>
|
||
<figcaption>
|
||
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies at a joint hearing of the Senate Judiciary and Commerce committees on Capitol Hill on April 10, 2018. | Xinhua/Ting Shen/Getty Images
|
||
</figcaption>
|
||
</figure>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
Big Tech poses an enormous challenge to free speech — but we aren’t having the right debate about it.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ycJDDw">
|
||
America’s commitment to free speech is uniquely radical.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="FshZT0">
|
||
The US Constitution treats freedom of expression as the master freedom that makes every other possible. And our legal system reflects this view, which is why it has always been incredibly difficult to suppress or punish speech in this country.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Pygqu3">
|
||
But there has never been a consensus on how to implement the First Amendment. Free speech law has evolved a ton over the years, especially in the aftermath of revolutions in media technology. The birth of radio and television, for example, altered the information landscape, creating new platforms for speech and new regulatory hurdles.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="h54pM6">
|
||
Today, the big challenge is the internet and the many ways it has transformed the public square. In fact, if a public square exists at all anymore, it’s virtual. And that’s problematic because our communication platforms are controlled by a handful of tech companies — Twitter, Facebook, Google, and Amazon.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="EG8LLB">
|
||
So what happens when companies like <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/how-facebook-twitter-decided-take-down-trump-s-accounts-n1254317">Facebook and Twitter</a> decide, as they did in the aftermath of the <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2021/1/6/22217657/us-capitol-breach-trump-rally-presidential-election">insurrection on January 6</a>, to ban the president of the United States for “glorifying violence” and spreading dangerous misinformation about the election? Is that a violation of the First Amendment?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="IzXhSV">
|
||
The conventional response is no<strong>: </strong>Facebook and Twitter are private companies, free to do whatever they want with their platforms. That’s not wrong, but it is oversimplified. If the public square is controlled by a few private companies and they have the power to collectively ban citizens whenever they want, then doesn’t that give them the ability to effectively deny constitutionally protected liberties?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="S8HGRi">
|
||
There are no simple answers to these questions, so I reached out to Genevieve Lakier, a law professor at the University of Chicago and an expert on the history of the First Amendment, to explore some of the tensions. Lakier believes our current debate about deplatforming — and free speech more generally — is too hollow.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="BcnDIQ">
|
||
We talk about why contemporary First Amendment law is poorly equipped to handle threats to speech in the internet era, why we don’t want tech CEOs arbitrarily policing speech, what it means to have private control of the mass public sphere, and what, if anything, we can do on the policy front to deal with all of these challenges.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="1JJzqO">
|
||
A lightly edited transcript of our conversation follows.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="5S8Onx">
|
||
Sean Illing
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="epk4n2">
|
||
What does the law actually say about the right of private companies like Twitter or Facebook to censor or ban users at will? Is it legal?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="mWjySl">
|
||
Genevieve Lakier
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Cuywm8">
|
||
It is definitely legal. The First Amendment imposes very strict non-discrimination duties on government actors. So the government isn’t allowed to ban speech just because it wants to ban speech. There’s only going to be a limited set of cases in which it’s allowed to do that.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="abv2Nz">
|
||
But the First Amendment only limits government actors, and no matter how powerful they are under current rules, Facebook, Amazon, and Twitter are not going to be considered government actors. So constitutionally they have total freedom to do whatever they want with the speech on their platforms.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="p3jUmt">
|
||
The only caveat here is that they can’t permit unlawful speech on their platforms, like child pornography or speech that violates copyright protections or speech that’s intended to communicate a serious threat or incite violence. Bun in those cases, it’s not the tech companies making the decision, it’s the courts.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="xLsSnT">
|
||
Sean Illing
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="q5GYlV">
|
||
So why do you believe that our current legal framework is inadequate for dealing with free speech and tech platforms?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="80WMzP">
|
||
Genevieve Lakier
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="PosiJ1">
|
||
It’s inadequate because it rests on a false understanding of the speech marketplace. The best explanation for why we have a strict state action restriction on the scope of the First Amendment is the government is a regulator of the speech marketplace, so we want to limit its ability to kick anyone out of the marketplace of ideas.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="U64l4n">
|
||
Ideally, we want to give people who participate in the marketplace of ideas a lot of freedom to discriminate when it comes to speech because that’s how the marketplace of ideas separates good ideas from bad ideas. You couldn’t have an effective marketplace of ideas if people couldn’t decide which ideas they want to associate with and which ideas they don’t.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="uv2OFY">
|
||
And that makes sense at a certain level of abstraction. But the world we live in is not the one where the government is the only governor of the marketplace of ideas. The whole public-private distinction doesn’t really map onto the world of today. If that was the world we lived in, the current rules would work fantastically. But as the platforms make clear, private actors very often are themselves governors of the marketplace of ideas. They’re dictating who can speak and how they may speak.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="z41KQI">
|
||
Facebook and Twitter are not government actors, they don’t have an army, you can leave them much more easily than you can leave the United States. But when it comes to the regulation of speech, all the concerns that we have about government censorship — that it’s going to limit diversity of expression, that it’s going to manipulate public opinion, that it’s going to target dissident or heterodox voices — also apply to these massive private actors, yet under the current First Amendment rules there is no mechanism to protect against those harms.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="fiJwEf">
|
||
Sean Illing
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="LcwDXT">
|
||
I absolutely don’t want Mark Zuckerberg or Jack Dorsey or John Roberts deciding what kind of speech is permissible, but the reality is that these tech platforms are guided by perverse incentives and they do promote harmful speech and dangerous misinformation and that does have real-world consequences.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Yg6a7K">
|
||
But if we want a truly open and free society, are those just risks we have to live with?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="d1uTbc">
|
||
Genevieve Lakier
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="vCIphv">
|
||
To some degree, yes. People love to talk about free speech as an unadulterated good, but the truth is that the commitment to free speech has always meant a commitment to allowing harmful speech to circulate. Free speech means little if it only means protection for speech that we don’t think is objectionable or harmful. So yeah, a society organized on the principle of free speech is going to have to tolerate harmful speech.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="phoK97">
|
||
But that doesn’t mean that we have to tolerate all harmful speech, or that we can’t do anything to protect ourselves against harassment or threats or violent speech. Right now we have what’s widely seen as a crisis of speech moderation on these platforms. The platforms themselves are responding through effective self-regulation. But those efforts are always going to be guided by the profit motive, so I’m skeptical about how far that’s going to get us when it comes to sustainable speech moderation policies.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="FjsrnN">
|
||
Sean Illing
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="EBoJF7">
|
||
Do you want the government telling Zuckerberg or Dorsey how to moderate content?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="ucJQt9">
|
||
Genevieve Lakier
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="gkeHFs">
|
||
We might, as democratic citizens, think that our democratic government should have something to say about the speech that flows through the platforms. That doesn’t necessarily mean that we want Congress telling Jack Dorsey or Mark Zuckerberg what speech they may or may not allow. There’s a tremendous amount of disagreement about what’s harmful speech, or where to draw the lines, and you might not think Congress is in a good position to make those kinds of decisions.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="yJesmb">
|
||
Perhaps we want a diversity of approaches to content moderation across the platforms, and the government establishing a uniform speech code would undermine that. But at the same time the platforms are governors of speech, they’re the regulators of incredibly important forums of mass communication. And so I, as a democratic citizen who thinks the free speech principle is intended to facilitate democratic ends, want there to be more democratic oversight of what happens on the speech platforms.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="hyHjfS">
|
||
Sean Illing
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="xPT1h4">
|
||
That sounds perfectly reasonable in the abstract, but what would “democratic oversight” look like in practice?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="aoUwZF">
|
||
Genevieve Lakier
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="kp4OLj">
|
||
One way is to mandate transparency. To require the platforms to give more information to the public, to researchers, to the government, about how they’re making content moderation decisions, so ordinary citizens can assess if it’s good or bad, or what the effects of the policies are. That’s tricky because you’d have to think about what kind of information the platforms should be required to give and whether or not it would offer us any real insight. But I do think there’s a role for transparency here.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="07Xdfa">
|
||
Alternatively, if we recognize that these private actors are playing such a tremendously important role in our public life, we could think about ways to make their decision-making more democratic or more democratically legitimate. So there have been proposals to create a kind of regulatory agency that would potentially collaborate with some of the platforms on developing policies. That might create more democratic structures of governance inside these platforms.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="rwwJ7F">
|
||
Sean Illing
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Xd6OrS">
|
||
What do you make of <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20-197_5ie6.pdf">Justice Clarence Thomas’s</a> recent suggestion that we should consider treating tech platforms like “common carriers” and regulate them like public utilities? Is that a good idea?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="DiKSG0">
|
||
Genevieve Lakier
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="bp2hf2">
|
||
This is an idea that people on both the left and the right have suggested in recent years, but that had always been viewed as very constitutionally problematic. So it’s interesting that Justice Thomas thinks a common carrier platform law would be constitutional.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="vZoaNg">
|
||
Practically, it’s hard to see how a common carrier regime would work. Common carrier laws— which prevent private actors from excluding almost any speech — work well when applied to companies whose job primarily is moving speech from one place to another. But the social media companies do a lot more than that: one of the primary benefits they provide to their users is by moderating content, to facilitate conversation, to flag news or videos as relevant, etc.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="V1rBPG">
|
||
Common carrier obligations would make it difficult for the companies to perform this service, so the common carrier analogy doesn’t really work. Justice Thomas also suggested the possibility of subjecting the platforms to <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/5/22368045/clarence-thomas-social-media-regulation-knight-v-trump">public accommodations law</a>. Now, that seems more viable, because public accommodations law doesn’t prevent private companies from denying service to customers altogether, it merely limits the bases on which they could do so.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="Ys9mtg">
|
||
Sean Illing
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Cfm4RQ">
|
||
Going back to your point about transparency, even if a company like Twitter formulated what most people might consider transparent and responsible speech policies (which I doubt, but let’s just grant that possibility), I don’t see any way to enforce it consistently over time. There is just too much ambiguity and the boundaries between free and harmful speech are impossible to define, much less police.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="MJlrOY">
|
||
Genevieve Lakier
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="iMeuhe">
|
||
Regulation of speech is always tricky, and the scale of the speech and the transnational scope of these platforms creates enormous challenges. The best we can do is to try and develop mechanisms, appeals, processes, reviews, and transparency obligations where the platform’s disclosing what it’s doing and how it’s doing it. I think that’s the best we can do. It won’t be perfect, but it would be good to get to a system where we have some reason to believe that the decision-making is not ad hoc and totally discretionary.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="6DSwlW">
|
||
Sean Illing
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="CIAM5S">
|
||
Are there free speech models around the world that the US could follow or replicate? A country like Germany, for example, isn’t comfortable with private companies deplatforming citizens, so they <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-42510868">passed a law in 2017</a> restricting online incitement and hate speech.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="2YYsuF">
|
||
Is there any room for an approach like that in the US?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="wU6kIA">
|
||
Genevieve Lakier
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="8PD5BG">
|
||
The First Amendment makes it extremely difficult for the government to require platforms to take down speech that doesn’t fall into some very narrow categories. Again, incitement is one of those categories, but it is defined very narrowly in the cases to mean only speech that is intended, and likely, to lead to violence or lawbreaking. Hate speech is not one of those categories. That means that Congress could make it a crime to engage in incitement on the platforms but that would apply only to a very limited range of speech.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="lM2NLM">
|
||
Sean Illing
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="hTHJjE">
|
||
I know you believe the platforms were justified in banning Trump after <a href="https://www.vox.com/22217039/capitol-attack-trump-rally-election-biden-explained">the assault on the Capitol in January</a>, but do you also believe that we should punish or censor public officials for lying or perpetrating frauds on the public?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="knKxmY">
|
||
Genevieve Lakier
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="uioxAu">
|
||
I think politicians should be able to be punished for lies, but I also think it’s very dangerous because the distinction between truth and lies is often difficult or subjective, and obviously democratic politics involves a lot of exaggeration and hyperbole and things that skirt the line between truth and lying. So we wouldn’t want a rule that allows whoever’s in power to silence their enemies or critics.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="L2HqCY">
|
||
But on the other hand, we already prosecute all kinds of lies. We prosecute fraud, for instance. When someone lies to you to get a material benefit, they can go to jail. When prosecuted, the fact that you used speech to effectuate that fraudulent end is not a defense. As a subspecies of this, we criminalize election fraud. So if someone lies to you about the location of a polling place or they give you intentionally incorrect information about how to vote, they can go to prison.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="b1wc9K">
|
||
Political lies that constitute fraud or that contribute to confusion about an election are in a narrow category of their own. So for example, I think President Trump’s lies about the outcome of the election are a species of election fraud. When used to achieve material benefit or electoral benefit where he’s going to use those lies in order to justify staying in power, that feels like the kind of lie that perhaps we want to include in our election fraud category.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="wHoW0f">
|
||
Sean Illing
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="ejXBtt">
|
||
I just can’t imagine political speech, which is very different from commercial speech, ever being controlled that way. A border case like Trump inciting violence might be as clear-cut as it gets, but what about propaganda? Sophistry? And the innumerable forms of bullshit that have always constituted democratic politics? Democracy is a contest of persuasion and politicians and parties are always going to deceive and manipulate in pursuit of power and money.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="gpncSX">
|
||
That’s just baked into the democratic cake, right?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="GeMeTm">
|
||
Genevieve Lakier
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="qHApQs">
|
||
So I agree that there’s a category we could call election fraud that maybe we feel okay prosecuting and then there’s ordinary political bullshit that maybe we don’t. But I’m going to throw a question back at you, because I think that there are cases on the border that are really difficult. For example, what about <a href="https://www.vox.com/21820485/trump-misleading-fundraising-emails-post-election">the lies that Trump told his supporters</a> in order to keep contributing to his fund after the election?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="mQL3vP">
|
||
To me, that looks like fraud. If it wasn’t a politician, we would just call it classic fraud. But in the political domain, we call it something else. I’m not entirely sure about to think about this, but it’s an interesting case.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="pyhwE8">
|
||
Sean Illing
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="8liPtG">
|
||
Oh, no doubt it’s fraudulent, but I guess my point is that a great deal of politics is fraudulent in the same way, though it’s usually less overt than Trump’s hucksterism. Parties and politicians and special interest groups lie and peddle half-truths all the time. There’s so much bullshit in our political system that Trump appealed to a lot of people precisely because he was so transparently full of shit, which says quite a bit about where we’re at. The idea that we could ever meaningfully punish lying strikes me as fantastical.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h4 id="I2jr3G">
|
||
Genevieve Lakier
|
||
</h4>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="NLfB4c">
|
||
What’s so interesting is that when you look at commercial speech cases, it’s not even controversial to prosecute false advertising. There’s no debate that false advertising is outside the scope of First Amendment protection.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="7EqslQ">
|
||
The justification for that is often that the person who’s selling you the commercial good has information about the good that the consumer doesn’t have and cannot get, so if they tell you it will cure bad breath or whatever, you have to trust them. When there’s a clear imbalance in knowledge and access between the speaker and the listener, the court says it’s okay to prosecute lying.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="cZDs3q">
|
||
One approach I’ve thought about, though I’m not sure it would work, is when a politician is lying about something that the member of the public has no way of checking or verifying either on their own or through public sources.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="2EebT6">
|
||
One of the reasons that the lies about the election were so damaging is because the people who were listening to those lies, they didn’t have any way of knowing whether this was or was not happening. I suppose they did though, they could rely on other news sources. But it was very difficult for them to verify what was happening in the black box of the election machinery.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="PjSTTs">
|
||
So yeah, I agree that lying is an intrinsic part of democratic politics, but I also think that there are certain kinds of lies that are very difficult to respond to just through the ordinary marketplace of ideas. A huge challenge moving forward will be navigating these kinds of questions in a rapidly changing landscape.
|
||
</p></li>
|
||
<li><strong>HIPAA, the health privacy law that’s more limited than you think, explained</strong> -
|
||
<figure>
|
||
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/BR-oeQSTuwRv4O1udVDAlMGeisw=/454x0:2587x1600/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/69154998/hipaa_final.0.png"/>
|
||
<figcaption>
|
||
Amanda Northrop/Vox
|
||
</figcaption>
|
||
</figure>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
You probably don’t know what HIPAA really means. Let’s fix that.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<div class="c-float-left">
|
||
<figure class="e-image">
|
||
<img alt="Open Sourced logo" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/lcj6gww0ZKRDdVz0qOCNWvVxgYw=/800x0/filters:no_upscale()/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/19433750/open_sourced_story_logo.png"/>
|
||
</figure>
|
||
</div>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="avHTuP">
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="q3O61x">
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Wo1zuY">
|
||
The first thing you should know about HIPAA is that it’s HIPAA, not HIPPA. There is only one P, and that P doesn’t stand for “privacy.”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="AJy1vy">
|
||
“People make up what that acronym stands for,” Deven McGraw, co-founder and chief regulatory officer of medical records platform Ciitizen and former deputy director for Health Information Privacy at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office for Civil Rights (OCR), told Recode.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="WXYbOD">
|
||
“More often than not, [they think it’s] Health Information Privacy Protection Act: HIPPA. Yeah, that law does not exist.”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Ld4gS2">
|
||
Both the misspelling and the widespread belief that HIPAA confers a strict set of privacy protections to any and all health data — and that everyone is subject to those laws — are common and understandable mistakes: HIPAA is pronounced like “hippo” but with an “a,” and most patients only come across it when signing the notice of privacy practices that the law mandates their health care providers have them sign. Plus, most people consider their health information to be very sensitive and assume their lawmakers have put the appropriate guardrails in to keep it as private as possible. But HIPAA’s privacy rules are more limited than they may realize.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="jII1a8">
|
||
“HIPAA has great branding, because everyone knows it, even if they spell it wrong,” Lucia Savage, chief privacy and regulatory officer at Omada Health and former chief privacy officer at HHS’s Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT, told Recode. “What is not well understood is its limits. It’s very specifically a law that regulates information that is collected because a person is seeking health care.”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="V9m7m8">
|
||
Normally, the misunderstanding would be an innocuous if annoying one. But the pandemic has helped bring health privacy issues to the fore. As with many other things over the last year, we’ve moved many of our health interactions online. Some of those may not be covered by HIPAA, but many people simply assume they are. And as the pandemic became increasingly politicized, many people cited HIPAA as an excuse to get out of mask mandates and to declare vaccine passports to be illegal. Neither of these assertions is true, but that hasn’t stopped many people from making them — even though using them to avoid public safety measures could be harmful to everyone.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="9k3Kyt">
|
||
“It sure seems to have gotten worse in the Covid era, because the misinformation that’s being promulgated through social media channels is wildly off-base and yet asserted with such a high level of confidence that people believe it,” McGraw said.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="aiJURa">
|
||
The perception that HIPAA is solely a health privacy law that everyone is subject to has become so common that there’s now a Twitter account to document it.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="cCNBju">
|
||
A few months into the pandemic, <a href="https://twitter.com/BadHippa">Bad HIPPA Takes</a> — the misspelling is an intentional nod to how often people who claim to know the law get the acronym wrong — emerged. It was created by an anonymous former health care provider who told Recode they were sick of seeing rampant misinformation about HIPAA and concerned that it could cause harm.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<div id="3BbiaE">
|
||
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" dir="ltr" lang="nl">
|
||
HIPA, HIPPA, HOORAY <a href="https://t.co/1fhvDNVtZr">pic.twitter.com/1fhvDNVtZr</a>
|
||
</p>
|
||
— Bad HIPPA Takes (<span class="citation" data-cites="BadHippa">@BadHippa</span>) <a href="https://twitter.com/BadHippa/status/1380163887442526210?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 8, 2021</a>
|
||
</blockquote></div></li>
|
||
</ul>
|
||
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="tmolGs">
|
||
The Bad HIPPA Takes account creator says some of the most common HIPAA inaccuracies over the last year have been about wearing masks, contact tracing, mandatory temperature checks, and, now, vaccine passports.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="LxPHwq">
|
||
“There is a massive amount of confusion about who and what HIPAA actually applies to,” they said. “The sheer volume of bad information about it is nearly insurmountable.”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<div id="TH56WW">
|
||
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" dir="ltr" lang="en">
|
||
In other news, your doctor can’t ask you health questions because of HIPAA. <a href="https://t.co/dTx0CC3r8n">pic.twitter.com/dTx0CC3r8n</a>
|
||
</p>
|
||
— Bad HIPPA Takes (<span class="citation" data-cites="BadHippa">@BadHippa</span>) <a href="https://twitter.com/BadHippa/status/1382386895636766722?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 14, 2021</a>
|
||
</blockquote>
|
||
</div>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="UtxJKj">
|
||
Suffice it to say, Bad HIPPA Takes has plenty of material to draw from for its more than 11,000 followers. But actually informing the general public about what HIPAA does is another matter.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="YvEc89">
|
||
“Trying to get people to understand what a Covered Entity or Business Associate is in 280 characters is not an easy task,” the person who runs the account said. “I can write the words, but of course this platform doesn’t lend itself well to considered, nuanced discussion.”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h3 id="QvrpQ0">
|
||
What HIPAA actually does
|
||
</h3>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="DkliGP">
|
||
So, what does that one P stand for if not privacy? Portability, obviously.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Fv5kIS">
|
||
HIPAA is short for the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. The 1996 law’s origins lie in creating federal standards for digitizing medical claims data and records (“accountability”) and allowing employees to have health insurance coverage, including for preexisting conditions, when they changed jobs (that’s the “portability”) — rights they did not have before the Affordable Care Act.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="KNco4G">
|
||
The privacy provision that most of us associate HIPAA with today wasn’t actually the focus of the law at the time.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="11ZXWf">
|
||
“When Congress was passing this law, they realized that there was going to be this massive digitization of health data, and there might need to be privacy protections for that,” McGraw said.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Fi56PW">
|
||
It took a few years to work those out, so HIPAA’s privacy rules weren’t issued until the end of 2000, and didn’t fully take effect until 2002. They were most recently <a href="https://www.hipaajournal.com/2013-hipaa-guidelines/">updated</a> in 2013.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="oqXis4">
|
||
There are several elements to HIPAA, including provisions to prevent health care fraud, simplify and standardize medical records, rules for pre-tax employee medical savings accounts, and to ensure continuous health insurance coverage for employees who lost or changed their jobs. For the purposes of this explainer, we’re focusing on the privacy rule, which falls under its <a href="https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/hipaa-simplification-201303.pdf">administrative simplification</a> section.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="uJnMqN">
|
||
HIPAA only applies to what are called “<a href="https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/covered-entities/index.html">covered entities</a>.” Those are, essentially, health care providers (doctors, hospitals, and pharmacies, for instance), health insurers, and health care clearinghouses (which process medical data). It also covers their “business associates,” or contractors who have to handle medical records in some way to do work for those covered entities. Those parties are required to follow certain protocols to keep your protected health information secure and private.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="07PfbH">
|
||
And that’s why your health care provider or insurer might require you to communicate with them through secure, HIPAA-compliant channels and patient portals, or take other steps to verify your identity before discussing protected health information with you. HIPAA’s privacy rule also requires that health care providers give you, the patient, a <a href="https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/ocr/privacy/hipaa/npp_layered_hc_provider.pdf">notice of their privacy practices</a> and allow you to access your own medical records. In fact, a lot of HIPAA complaints from patients aren’t about privacy violations but about lack of access to medical records.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<div id="gpD78u">
|
||
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" dir="ltr" lang="en">
|
||
Better yet, tell him you did then we he asks to see your car card as proof, hit him with a HIPPA lawsuit.<br/><br/>College for free!!!
|
||
</p>
|
||
— I am going to upset to drive self inflections (<span class="citation" data-cites="JASONWI72430456">@JASONWI72430456</span>) <a href="https://twitter.com/JASONWI72430456/status/1382451011789406214?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 14, 2021</a>
|
||
</blockquote>
|
||
</div>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="r1XYBf">
|
||
If you think your HIPAA rights have been violated, you can complain to the HHS <a href="https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/index.html">Office of Civil Rights</a>. But — and this is another common misconception, as indicated by the above tweets — you can’t sue the alleged offender yourself. The Office of Civil Rights takes action, if warranted, for instance by issuing fines or even criminal penalties to offenders.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h3 id="BSUNVn">
|
||
What HIPAA doesn’t do
|
||
</h3>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="FFs4aP">
|
||
It’s important to note that medical privacy didn’t begin with HIPAA, and it’s not the only health privacy law out there. There are other laws that protect <a href="https://www.aidslawpa.org/alpp-services/confidentiality-of-hiv-related-information/#:~:text=State%20and%20federal%20laws%20prohibit,with%20HIV%20is%20still%20pervasive.">certain</a> types of health information: Some <a href="https://consumercal.org/about-cfc/cfc-education-foundation/cfceducation-foundationyour-medical-privacy-rights/confidentiality-of-medical-information-act/">states</a> have their own stricter medical privacy laws, or things like the Americans with Disabilities Act, which mandates that employers must keep disability-related medical information about their employees confidential. And the concept of doctor-patient confidentiality has existed for a long time — it’s part of the Hippocratic Oath (which is not a law) — and that trust is a necessary part of good medical care.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="gomRKV">
|
||
“If I’m the doctor and you’re the patient, you come to me, you might tell me some really secret things,” Savage said. “And I need to know that to give you the right care and diagnose you properly.”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="2AVjFl">
|
||
At the same time, many of us freely give our health information away to <a href="https://www.healthit.gov/sites/default/files/non-covered_entities_report_june_17_2016.pdf">all kinds of places</a> and people who have no real legal obligation to keep that information private or secure. With the internet, there are more ways to do that than ever.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="6tLSx0">
|
||
“I think, generally, when you’re talking about interactions with the health care system, the likelihood that they’re protected by HIPAA is very strong,” McGraw said. “Now, where those things break down: obviously, if you’re recording your steps on a Fitbit or you’re using a nutrition app, that’s not going to be covered by HIPAA.”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="VM0hWx">
|
||
That therapist appointment you tweeted about? Your vaccine Instagram selfie? Your membership in a Facebook support group for people who have herpes? The period tracker app on your phone? The heart rate monitor on your wrist? Browsing WebMD for information about your recent lupus diagnosis? The mail-order DNA test? The Uber trip you took to the emergency room? That’s all health information, most of it is directly tied to you, it can be sensitive, and none of it is covered by HIPAA<strong> </strong>(unless protected health information is shared with a covered entity, as is the case with <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/health-care-provider-apps-are-private-but-fitness-apps-not-so-much">some digital health services</a>).
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="RpHmkD">
|
||
And then we’ve got the organizations that handle health data but aren’t covered by HIPAA, including most schools, law enforcement, life insurers, and even <a href="https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-individuals/employers-health-information-workplace/index.html">employers</a>. They may be covered by other privacy laws, but HIPAA isn’t one of them.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="AHyyZB">
|
||
And, right now, even some things that actually are covered by HIPAA have been given a temporary enforcement waiver due to the pandemic. The Office of Civil Rights will <a href="https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/special-topics/emergency-preparedness/notification-enforcement-discretion-telehealth/index.html">not be enforcing</a> its rule requiring health care providers to use HIPAA-compliant portals for telehealth, <a href="https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2021/01/19/ocr-announces-notification-enforcement-discretion-use-online-web-based-scheduling-applications-scheduling-covid-19-vaccination-appointments.html">nor will it require</a> covered entities to use HIPAA-compliant systems to schedule vaccines — an issue that arose when some health services’ sign-up portals crashed and they <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/22213913/florida-vaccine-eventbrite">turned to Eventbrite</a>. Eventbrite is a good service for getting a lot of people signed up for an event in high demand, but it’s <a href="https://www.eventbrite.com/security/">not HIPAA-compliant</a>. The Office of Civil Rights told Recode that enforcement discretion will remain in effect “until the Secretary of HHS determines that the public health emergency no longer exists.”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="CP7Af7">
|
||
All this is to say that if you go to Starbucks (not a covered entity) and refuse to wear a mask because you say you have a health condition, it is not a HIPAA violation if the barista asks you what that condition is, nor is it a HIPAA violation if Starbucks refuses service to you.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="YDNr94">
|
||
If your doctor were to walk into that Starbucks and broadcast your health information to anyone within earshot without your permission, <em>that</em> would be a HIPAA violation. It would also be a good time to consider changing doctors. Fortunately, HIPAA allows you to request your medical records and bring them to a new provider. And if someone else happened to record your doctor’s outburst and put it on TikTok, that’s not a HIPAA violation, even though it does include information that was once protected by HIPAA.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="eY47vs">
|
||
“The protections don’t cling to the data and protect it all the way downstream,” McGraw said.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="s2VBRn">
|
||
Additionally, someone asking if you’ve been vaccinated is not a HIPAA violation. In fact, it’s not a HIPAA violation for anyone to ask about any health condition you may have, though it might be considered rude. A business requiring you to show proof that you’ve been vaccinated before you can enter is not a HIPAA violation. Your employer requiring you to be vaccinated and show proof before you can go to the office is not a HIPAA violation. Schools requiring that students get certain vaccinations before they’re allowed to attend is not a HIPAA violation.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="iFYCar">
|
||
Oh, and vaccine passports — which the Biden administration has <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/22349266/vaccine-passports-vaccination-record-commpass-walmart-walgreens">already said</a> it has no plans to mandate and which have been around for decades <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/04/08/985253421/the-history-of-vaccine-passports-in-the-u-s-and-whats-new">if not longer</a> — are also not HIPAA violations. Let’s look at New York’s Excelsior Pass. To use it, you are voluntarily giving the app permission to access your health records, and, as the app’s disclaimer <a href="https://epass.ny.gov/terms">clearly states</a>: “[T]he website is not provided to you by a health care provider, so, as such, you are not providing protected health information for health care treatment, payment, or operations (as defined under Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA)).”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="SHNEmF">
|
||
That’s not to say there might not be other, non-HIPAA violations at play here. Certain anti-discrimination laws limit what medical information employers and businesses can require their employees or customers to provide, and they are mandated to make reasonable accommodations for qualifying health conditions. But even those other laws do not, as we’ve seen, mean that businesses <a href="https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-warns-inaccurate-flyers-and-postings-regarding-use-face-masks-and">have to allow unmasked people</a> in their establishments or that they can’t require employees to get vaccinated (unless they have a medical or religious reason why they can’t be).
|
||
</p>
|
||
<h3 id="5Iwkzy">
|
||
Closing the health privacy law gap
|
||
</h3>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="HvWpsG">
|
||
So HIPAA isn’t the all-inclusive health privacy law so many people assume it is, but that mass assumption suggests that such a law is both wanted and needed. HIPAA has a lot of gaps that a privacy law can and should fill. The pandemic has only made this more apparent.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="uazrAJ">
|
||
“People are fairly protective of their health information,” Caitriona Fitzgerald, deputy director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), told Recode. “They just assume it would be covered because it’s absurd that it’s not.”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="2Iw80x">
|
||
Experts believe that this coverage must come from comprehensive federal privacy laws that include provisions for sensitive information, like health data, or for what could be considered sensitive uses of data.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="SVYcqg">
|
||
“What we need is for Congress to pass a comprehensive privacy law that sets limits on what the companies can use this data for, how long they can keep it, who they can disclose it to, and doesn’t put the burden of dealing with that on the individual,” Fitzgerald said. “The burden needs to be on the company that’s collecting the data to protect it and to minimize its use.”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="WWDitW">
|
||
Savage said people who are concerned with health privacy laws might find a more productive use of their time in contacting their legislators to advocate for the health privacy laws they believe they are entitled to.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Q6T3hr">
|
||
“For individual legislators to move on something, they have to understand why it’s important,” Savage said. “And that’s where the human stories come in. Even just an email to your legislator saying, ‘I had this thing happen and I was really worried, it made me vaccine-hesitant. Can you please fix this?’”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="G5W9qg">
|
||
Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-WA) is one of several lawmakers who has pushed for better health privacy protections during the pandemic, including as a co-sponsor of the Public Health Emergency Privacy Act, a bill that was introduced in both houses of Congress in 2020 and <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/22251118/vaccine-health-data-privacy-laws-philadelphia">reintroduced</a> in early 2021. It would protect digital health data collected for the purpose of stopping the pandemic (for instance, by contact tracing apps or vaccine appointment booking tools) from being used for unrelated purposes by the government or private businesses.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="KAPtbo">
|
||
“HIPAA provides some protections for our health information, but technology has advanced must faster than our laws,” DelBene told Recode. “The Public Health Emergency Privacy Act shows how we can protect consumers’ information during the pandemic, but I believe we need to go further since this issue permeates every part of our digital lives.”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="0E84UC">
|
||
DelBene <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/22301174/federal-privacy-bill-suzan-delbene">recently introduced</a> the Information Transparency and Personal Data Control Act, which includes added protections for sensitive information like health data. It’s one of what will likely be several consumer privacy bills introduced this session, any one of which could give Americans better health privacy protections. That is, of course, assuming any of them actually pass.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="JlCHfy">
|
||
In the meantime, well, at least we have the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which can — and has — gone after apps and websites that violated their own privacy policies — <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2021/01/developer-popular-womens-fertility-tracking-app-settles-ftc">including a period tracker app</a>.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="b1fvxC">
|
||
And while Bad HIPPA Takes is no fan of how the law has been misinterpreted to erroneously declare that vaccine passports are illegal, they are concerned with where individual privacy (not HIPAA) rights stop and where a business’s property rights begin when it comes to those passports.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="6wAD7X">
|
||
“If you live in rural America and Walmart is your only grocery store, do you just have to shop online forever, at additional cost and expense, because they decide to require vaccination to enter their stores?” they asked. “What if you are in that situation and are unbanked? The so-called digital divide could make things worse for a lot of people in the short term if implementation of a vaccine passport system is done recklessly.”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="UHgcdi">
|
||
That’s not a HIPAA take, but it is a take worth considering.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="lpG1kD">
|
||
<a href="http://www.vox.com/open-sourced"><em>Open Sourced</em></a><em> is made possible by Omidyar Network. All Open Sourced content is editorially independent and produced by our journalists.</em>
|
||
</p>
|
||
<ul>
|
||
<li><strong>Mark Zuckerberg says he’s standing up for you. Yes, you.</strong> -
|
||
<figure>
|
||
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/RbosYdWBHWyXz_HnWWBm374XW6A=/75x0:4799x3543/1310x983/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/69153079/1178141587.jpg.0.jpg"/>
|
||
<figcaption>
|
||
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg speaks at a press event hosted by News Corp in October 2019. | Drew Angerer/Getty Images
|
||
</figcaption>
|
||
</figure>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
The CEO of Facebook makes the case for Facebook.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="yZ9lue">
|
||
What does the man who singlehandedly controls the world’s most important tech platform think about that platform’s role in the world?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="nyDrAF">
|
||
He thinks it’s making the world a better place. Even if it causes some damage — mostly to people and institutions that are threatened by its rise.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="7sC18c">
|
||
The first part, of course, is what you would expect the CEO of Facebook to say in public. But the second part, which Mark Zuckerberg also said today in an interview where he rolled out <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/2021/4/18/22390742/facebook-podcasts-clubhouse-audio-launch-spotify-zuckerberg-apple">plans to build a set of audio tools</a>, is a sort of new and important idea.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="8bLlgB">
|
||
Sort of, because it’s what Zuckerberg and many of his employees — and, in fact, lots of Silicon Valley folks — have thought and said to each other for a long time: That the stuff they were making was a benefit for society, even if it also created serious problems along the way. That if you weighed it all out, they were doing more good than bad.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="lIZ1W7">
|
||
“<a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/growth-at-any-cost-top-facebook-executive-defended-data#.eeggDmkA3">De facto good</a>,” as Facebook exec Andrew Bosworth put it in a memo to his coworkers in June 2016.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="WKLtrV">
|
||
But Zuckerberg and crew haven’t talked like that in public for a long time — specifically, since Donald Trump’s election in 2016, followed by a series of damning and embarrassing scandals and disclosures.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="1m6zRR">
|
||
Since then, they’ve been in a defensive crouch, allowing — <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/oct/12/sheryl-sandberg-facebook-owes-us-an-apology-over-russian-meddling">over</a> and <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/25/17161398/facebook-mark-zuckerberg-apology-cambridge-analytica-full-page-newspapers-ads">over</a> — that they have a lot of responsibility and a lot of work to do. And, not coincidentally, telling government regulators around the world that <a href="https://www.vox.com/2019/3/31/18289375/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-regulation-washington-post-op-ed">they look forward to more regulation</a> so they could be even more responsible.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="fcvvOV">
|
||
That public posture makes plenty of sense in a world where Facebook (along with other big tech companies) faces increased scrutiny from lawmakers, and where its users who once celebrated Facebook now <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/meet-the-press/poll-americans-give-social-media-clear-thumbs-down-n991086">often resent Facebook</a>.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="7bAkcx">
|
||
But even though many of his top lieutenants have left in recent years, and even though his rank-and-file <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ryanmac/facebook-employee-leaks-show-they-feel-betrayed">employees often question whether they’re harming the world</a>, it would be weird if the guy who built Facebook and very much still runs Facebook thought Facebook was Fundamentally Bad.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="0FA94T">
|
||
Zuckerberg doesn’t think that. And today we got to hear him make his case for Facebook out loud, in an interview with tech journalist (and Vox Media contributor) <a href="https://www.platformer.news/">Casey Newton</a>.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="IQ3wv7">
|
||
Specifically, Zuckerberg argued, Facebook, and tech like Facebook, is good because while it can undermine the old, it helps people — individual people, as opposed to Big Faceless Authorities — create the new. And, crucially, that a lot of people complaining about Facebook and tech like Facebook are afraid of losing power.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="STSQuL">
|
||
It’s a way of thinking about the world that used to be common, and praised, in Silicon Valley and among technologists. It’s a mindset that melds the <a href="https://go.redirectingat.com?id=66960X1516588&xs=1&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.newyorker.com%2Fnews%2Fletter-from-silicon-valley%2Fthe-complicated-legacy-of-stewart-brands-whole-earth-catalog&referrer=vox.com&sref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.vox.com%2Frecode%2F2021%2F4%2F19%2F22392635%2Fmark-zuckerberg-case-for-facebook-audio-products-clubhouse-podcasts" rel="sponsored nofollow noopener" target="_blank">Whole Earth Catalog</a> with <a href="https://aynrand.org/novels/the-fountainhead/"><em>The Fountainhead</em></a> and a healthy dose of <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction">creative destruction</a>.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="OA51KA">
|
||
We have heard a lot less of that lately as the world reckons with some of the unintended consequences Silicon Valley has brought us in the last couple decades — like giant platforms that can quickly and effectively <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/what-the-capitol-riot-tells-us-about-online-power/id1080467174?i=1000505283254">mislead huge swaths of the population</a> about objective reality. But Zuckerberg, it’s clear, is still a believer.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="GiTTSN">
|
||
Here’s the transcript of this part of the exchange between Zuckerberg and Newton:
|
||
</p>
|
||
<blockquote>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="1rVhCb">
|
||
<strong>Casey Newton:</strong> You know that you run a very polarizing company. Some folks, I think, have maybe given up on the idea that Facebook can be a net positive in the world. So what is the case that you make to yourself every day that it is?
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="rjAlBq">
|
||
<strong>Mark Zuckerberg:</strong> I think that this is about enabling people. Right, so the question for me is, ‘Do you believe, at some basic level, that if you empower individuals that that leads to more good?’
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="8H0PT7">
|
||
And, you know, I think that we’re in a very tumultuous time, and a lot of institutions and the things that have been around for decades — people are losing faith in. And I think some for good reasons and some for not, but that dynamic is really shifting,
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="HjCqGw">
|
||
And I think a lot of the people in those institutions, or who are primarily sympathetic to it, look at a shift in the world, as a vision of the future where there’s more individuals who have more power and can kind of do what they want, rather than going through those channels — that that’s not a good future.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="rIf53a">
|
||
And you know, we tell stories about things like, you know how without traditional gatekeepers on information you have things like misinformation, running rampant — and look, I’m not trying to downplay that, right? I think misinformation is a real issue and I think that there should be things that [we] are focused on, on the basic stuff from spreading. We invest a lot in that.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="JSKxGS">
|
||
But I think if you look at the grand arc here, what’s really happening is individuals are getting more power and more opportunity to create the lives and the jobs that they want. And to connect with people they want. And to connect to the ideas that they want and to share the ideas that they want. And I just think that that will lead to a better world. It will be different from the world that we had before. I think it will be more diverse, I think more different ideas and models will be able to exist. And I think it inevitably means that some of the people who kind of had control over that world in the past will lose it, and I could see why those folks will lament the direction that it’s going in.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="Y3geDn">
|
||
But my concern is that we’re too frequently telling the negative sides of it, from the perspective of the institutions that may be not on on the winning side of these changes. Where I think the people who are on the winning side of these changes are individuals, you know, whether that’s the people who are going to use these tools and share how to connect to the people that want to have all kinds of new experiences. Or this whole new set of people in the creator economy who are now going to be able to participate in a whole new set of jobs that didn’t exist in the past, but allow fundamentally more creativity in the world.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="3eF1Lx">
|
||
So, I mean I’ve learned over the last several years not to be too pollyannish about this. There are real issues that need to be dealt with. But my own sense is that the narrative is a little too biased or maybe a lot too biased towards telling the negative side of the issues rather than all the value and opportunity that is being created.
|
||
</p>
|
||
</blockquote>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="IPujSe">
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="9WQv81">
|
||
Zuckerberg is at least partially correct — there are lots of upsides to technology. And Facebook provides lots of value to me, and presumably to most of the 2.8 billion people who use it worldwide. I also believe he believes that he’s helping people make choices about what they want to do and how they want to do it.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="N9r6DG">
|
||
The problem is that Facebook, Inc. isn’t just a tool that individuals can use. It’s a mammoth network, run largely without any oversight at all from the world’s citizens and governments. And even if you never use it, it can be enormously consequential. See, for instance, the evolution of the “<a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/11/5/21551437/stop-the-steal-facebook-group-takedown-members-violence-election-fraud-trump">stop the steal” movement</a> from Facebook-enabled chat groups to a <a href="https://www.vox.com/22215120/trump-stop-the-steal-protests-downtown-washington-dc-electoral-college">force</a> behind the <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/22221285/trump-online-capitol-riot-far-right-parler-twitter-facebook">Capitol riot</a>.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom" id="pUj2KX">
|
||
My hunch is that this won’t be the last time we hear Zuckerberg play up the notion that Facebook stands for individual liberty and choice. For one thing, Zuckerberg doesn’t do a lot of improv in public settings, and this isn’t the kind of messaging he just blurts out. More to the point: When you’re facing <a href="https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/10/6/21505027/congress-big-tech-antitrust-report-facebook-google-amazon-apple-mark-zuckerberg-jeff-bezos-tim-cook">public pressure to shrink yourself</a>, somehow, because you’re Too Big and Too Unaccountable, telling the world that you’re simply helping people make their own choices may seem like a good retort. Especially if you believe it.
|
||
</p></li>
|
||
</ul>
|
||
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-the-hindu-sports">From The Hindu: Sports</h1>
|
||
<ul>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Desperate SRH look for inspiration from Warner for turnaround in fortune</strong> - A big innings is due from the SRH captain.</p></li>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Dhoni-led CSK eye another win as fresh challenge awaits struggling KKR</strong> - The MS Dhoni-led side has come on its own with the ‘Captain Cool’ making the most of his resources.</p></li>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>All Proteas captains express concern over possible suspension by ICC</strong> - “The Proteas Men’s team has an ICC World T20 event in November.”</p></li>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>European Super League designed to “save football”, says Real Madrid’s chief Florentino Perez</strong> - A controversial decision to form a breakaway European Super League was taken “to save football” and in part motivated because “young people are no lon</p></li>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Premier League | Liverpool and Leeds share spoils amid Super League protests</strong> - A draw left sixth-placed Liverpool two points adrift of fourth-placed West Ham in the Premier League.</p></li>
|
||
</ul>
|
||
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-the-hindu-national-news">From The Hindu: National News</h1>
|
||
<ul>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Cabinet gives ex-post facto approval for amendments to Finance Bill, 2021</strong> - The Finance Bill became the Finance Act, 2021 on March 28, 2021 after receiving the President’s nod</p></li>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Boeing 737 MAX 8s can overfly India: DGCA</strong> - The aircraft continues to be banned for commercial operations in the country</p></li>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Transport strike: Not the right time for it, says HC</strong> - Hopes employees resume work without prejudice to their demands; says it violates fundamental rights of other citizens</p></li>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Impose lockdown in Gujarat to curb COVID-19 spread: IMA tells HC</strong> - “The government should completely ban all kind of gatherings.”</p></li>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Maharashtra imposes additional restrictions</strong> - Food and vegetable shops to stay open only for four hours a day</p></li>
|
||
</ul>
|
||
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-bbc-europe">From BBC: Europe</h1>
|
||
<ul>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Germany CDU: Armin Laschet backed by Merkel party in chancellor race</strong> - Armin Laschet wins the backing of the CDU executive for the chancellor’s job in September’s elections.</p></li>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>France seeks conspiracy theorist over kidnapping</strong> - Police issue an international warrant after a little French girl is abducted and rescued.</p></li>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>European Super League created to ‘save football’ - Real Madrid president Florentino Perez</strong> - The European Super League has been created “to save football”, says Real Madrid president Florentino Perez.</p></li>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>European Super League: How Europe has reacted</strong> - ‘The bonfire of greed’ and ‘the worst announcement in football history’ is just some of the reaction across Europe to the Super League.</p></li>
|
||
<li data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>‘I would like Russia to be more free’</strong> - The BBC’s Steve Rosenberg travels 2,000 miles east of Moscow to gauge the mood of ordinary Russians.</p></li>
|
||
</ul>
|
||
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-ars-technica">From Ars Technica</h1>
|
||
<ul>
|
||
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Google Play apps steal texts and pepper you with unauthorized purchases</strong> - Google removes eight apps after receiving report from researchers. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1758227">link</a></p></li>
|
||
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Microsoft Visual Studio 2022 will (finally) enter the 64-bit world</strong> - Next year’s upgrade—out for preview later this summer—looks like a doozy. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1758188">link</a></p></li>
|
||
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Marvel drops first teaser for Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings</strong> - Simu Liu stars as a gifted martial artist seeking to escape his dark family history. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1757928">link</a></p></li>
|
||
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>More J&J troubles: Vaccine manufacturing halted and more possible clot cases</strong> - CDC advisory committee will meet Friday to decide the fate of the troubled vaccine. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1758178">link</a></p></li>
|
||
<li><p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"><strong>Parler re-platformed as Apple allows social network back into App Store</strong> - “Free speech” social media network reportedly revamped its moderation approach. - <a href="https://arstechnica.com/?p=1758123">link</a></p></li>
|
||
</ul>
|
||
<h1 data-aos="fade-right" id="from-jokes-subreddit">From Jokes Subreddit</h1>
|
||
<ul>
|
||
<li><strong>My wife says we should split up because I keep pretending I’m a detective</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF -->
|
||
<div class="md">
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
I said good idea, we can cover more ground that way
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
Edit: Thank you for all the awards. I’ve never had silver before let alone 5 silver awards
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
Edit 2: Wow my first ever gold. Thank you
|
||
</p>
|
||
</div>
|
||
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/sewn_of_a_gun"> /u/sewn_of_a_gun </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/mumtqa/my_wife_says_we_should_split_up_because_i_keep/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/mumtqa/my_wife_says_we_should_split_up_because_i_keep/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
||
<li><strong>The local bar was so sure that its bartender was the strongest man around that they offered a standing $1000 bet</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF -->
|
||
<div class="md">
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
The local bar was so sure that its bartender was the strongest man around that they offered a standing $1000 bet.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
The bartender would squeeze a lemon until all the juice ran into a glass, and hand the lemon to a patron. Anyone who could squeeze one more drop of juice out would win the money.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
Many people had tried over time (weight-lifters, longshoremen, etc.) but nobody could do it.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
One day this scrawny little man came into the bar, wearing thick glasses and a polyester suit, and said in a tiny squeaky voice.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
“I’d like to try the bet.” After the laughter had died down, the bartender said OK, grabbed a lemon, and squeezed away.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
Then he handed the wrinkled remains of the rind to the little man.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
But the crowd’s laughter turned to total silence as the man clenched his fist around the lemon and six drops fell into the glass.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
As the crowd cheered, the bartender paid the $1000, and asked the little man.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
“What do you do for a living? Are you a lumberjack, a weight-lifter, what?”
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
The man replied, “I work for the IRS.”
|
||
</p>
|
||
</div>
|
||
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/Discko14"> /u/Discko14 </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/mu5657/the_local_bar_was_so_sure_that_its_bartender_was/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/mu5657/the_local_bar_was_so_sure_that_its_bartender_was/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
||
<li><strong>Wife said the grandkids were coming over for the first time..I spent five hours child-proofing the house.</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF -->
|
||
<div class="md">
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
They still got in.
|
||
</p>
|
||
</div>
|
||
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/in_sane_carbon_unit"> /u/in_sane_carbon_unit </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/muhzpt/wife_said_the_grandkids_were_coming_over_for_the/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/muhzpt/wife_said_the_grandkids_were_coming_over_for_the/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
||
<li><strong>A teacher told his students, “The person who answers my next question correctly gets to leave class early.”</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF -->
|
||
<div class="md">
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
Suddenly, a pen came flying across to room, practically hitting the teacher in the face.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
“Who threw that?!” the teacher shouted, angrily.
|
||
</p>
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
“Me!” piped up a voice from the back of the classroom. “Can I leave now?”
|
||
</p>
|
||
</div>
|
||
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/JeffersonComingHome"> /u/JeffersonComingHome </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/muemdy/a_teacher_told_his_students_the_person_who/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/muemdy/a_teacher_told_his_students_the_person_who/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
||
<li><strong>What do Chris Hemsworth and Mike Tyson have in common after a workout?</strong> - <!-- SC_OFF -->
|
||
<div class="md">
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom">
|
||
They’re both Thor.
|
||
</p>
|
||
</div>
|
||
<!-- SC_ON -->
|
||
<p data-aos="fade-left" data-aos-anchor-placement="bottom-bottom"> submitted by <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/WantedDadorAlive"> /u/WantedDadorAlive </a> <br/> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/muhe1g/what_do_chris_hemsworth_and_mike_tyson_have_in/">[link]</a></span> <span><a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/Jokes/comments/muhe1g/what_do_chris_hemsworth_and_mike_tyson_have_in/">[comments]</a></span></p></li>
|
||
</ul>
|
||
|
||
|
||
<script>AOS.init();</script></body></html> |