[Last Call] Combating Disinformation in Society

[Cessarea]

I've decided to bring this draft out of the basement filing cabinet, dust it off, and have another go at it after placing it on hold roughly a year ago after it fell out of quorum. Feedback and critcisms are welcome, just be gentle as the paper is brittle and is easily subject to wear and tear.

Orwell Society, the original author, wrote this some eight months ago. Well, I'd like to make his words my own now! This proposal is back in official drafting. I welcome any and all suggestions to it, and plead that they're made with certain haste - I do not intend to keep the drafting process going for long, given how much time has passed already.

Orwell Society is no longer active, but he will be rightfully credited as a co-auhor. The fourth draft is now incorporated into this OP:

Combating Disinformation in Society

Category: Political Stability
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Cessarea
Co-author: The Orwell Society

The World Assembly,

Discontent at the amount of disinformation on a variety of important topics that some member state's societies produce and distribute on a daily basis;

Knowing that said disinformation can be very harmful to society if believed to be true by a large part of the populace;

Determined to stop the spreading of injurious lies with the power of international law from this very Assembly.

Hereby enacts, in compliance with and subject to the provisions and mandates established by extant World Assembly law, the following:

1. For the purposes of this resolution, "disinformation" is defined as the distribution of claims or information that is manipulated or fabricated, entirely or partially fictional, or taken out of context for the purpose of deceiving its target - often the general public - by introducing false narratives into the public discourse, with the intention of agitating for violence or political action/support, usually in disfavour of a protected group or governmental effort. Disinformation must be:
   
   1. a statement made by a person, organization, or group of people; that is
   2. presented with the intention of being believed to be a true fact or a valid speculation or theory;
   3. with the knowledge, from the person/people who made the statement, that the statement is factually untrue; and is
   4. stated with a purposeful and reckless disregard for the statement's falsity; and
   5. is likely to cause harm to individuals, and/or
   6. is intended to harm the reputation and/or wellbeing of any persons, social group, organization, or nation.
2. Concomitantly, "misinformation" is defined similarly to disinformation, save for the sole and vital fact that it is spread without the understanding that it is false. The agent of misinformation has no intent to deceive or misguide and may earnestly believe that which they introduce into the public discourse. Agents that spread misinformation are - usually - informed by sources of disinformation. Due to its nature as a consequence of malicious acts, it is hereby established that:
   
   1. No individual shall be held criminally responsible for the spread of misinformation;
   2. Member-states are authorised to impose civil responsibility upon individuals within their jurisdiction, respecting the legislative bounds established by the World Assembly in regard to Civil Rights, Freedom of Expression; anf extraterritorial application of Law.
   3. Misinformation presented by organizations, public or private, for-profit or not, from which a higher level of scrutiny and fact-checking is expected, is encouraged to be dealt with administratively and civilly, without criminal charges being levied against them.
3. The establishment of the Forthright Association for Circulating Truth (shortened to FACT) to provide each memberstate with a force actively fighting against disinformation and misinformation alike.
   
   1. FACT will monitor internally, without public disclosure, leading sources of false, manipulated, fabricated, fictional, unreliable, or misleading information
   2. FACT shall not be responsible for denouncing or persecuting agents of disinformation, being tasked exclusively with the spread of truth and diligent research.
   3. FACT will not interfere in anything directly relating to or affecting one's religious beliefs, including that in which a person/peoples believe to be true, but excluding that in which is already scientifically or historically established. FACT will nevertheless advocate against calls for violence in disfavour of individuals, or groups thereof, regardless of belief.
   4. FACT will locate the sources of the disinformation and launch campaigns to combat it and provide the populace with proven, reliable facts backed by actual research and science.
   5. The disinformation handled by FACT will be on a variety of topics, including but not limited to: physical, emotional, and mental health; history; and science and technology.
   6. The information distributed by FACT must be proven fact, either by scientific, historical, or general research from proven, reliable sources. FACT shall ensure that a variety of sources are taken into account, and that differing versions of one topic are presented with neutrality, weighted by the preponderance of reliable, scientific evidence on the side of any given topic.
   7. FACT will distribute its research independently, by all means it deems reasonable, however individual member nation's governments can choose to specifically request and accommodate FACT within their nation. The information may be in any form each individual member nation's government pleases, whether it be by book, internet article, pamphlet, advertising campaign, television program, etc., as long as it is an efficient and effective method of spreading the information.
4. The criminalization of the deliberate, repeat spreading of harmful disinformation by a person, organization, or group of people.
   
   1. Punishment of an individual's violation of this ban will be decided upon by the individual member state's government;
   2. The criteria of knowledge and reckless disregard established by article 1, paragraph b and c, must be proven materially. Malicious intent must be established beyond a reasonable doubt for criminal liability;
   3. A threshold for minimum legal relevance for criminal liability is furthermore mandated. Statements that attend to the essential qualities of disinformation as established by article 1 must be further proven to have had significant impact within the proper context of the crime - local, regional, or national. Civil liability is unaffected by this requirement.

Hoping that these measures combat the spread of disinformation, for the betterment of all member states' societies.

Combating Disinformation in Society

Category: Political Stability
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: The Orwell Society

The World Assembly,

Discontent at the amount of disinformation on a variety of important topics that some member state's societies produce and distribute on a daily basis;

Knowing that said disinformation can be very harmful to society if believed to be true by a large part of the populace;

Determined to stop the spreading of injurious lies with the power of international law from this very Assembly.

Hereby defines for the purpose of this resolution:

1. "Disinformation," similar to misinformation, as false, unproven, and/or inaccurate information intentionally produced and distributed. In this resolution, all disinformation mentioned is that of a harmful effect. The promoting of harmful disinformation can be defined as:
   
   1. a statement made by a person, organization, or group of people; that is
   2. falsely represented and stated with the intention of being believed to be a true fact;
   3. with the knowledge, from the person/people who made the statement, that the statement is factually untrue; and/or
   4. stated with a purposeful and reckless disregard for the statement's falsity; and
   5. is likely to cause harm to individuals specifically holding an arbitrary or reductive characteristic; and/or
   6. is intended to harm the reputation and/or wellbeing of any persons or nation.
2. Note that all disinformation in this resolution is harmful on a international scale, i.e. harmful to a significant portion of a member state's populace.

Hereby enacts the following:

1. The establishment of the Forthright Association for Circulating Truth (shortened to FACT) to provide each memberstate with a force actively fighting against harmful disinformation.
   
   1. FACT will monitor leading sources of suspicious, unreliable, and/or outright misleading information that is widely believed as true.
   2. FACT will not interfere in anything directly relating to or affecting one's religous beliefs, including that in which a person/peoples believe to be true.
   3. FACT will locate the sources of the disinformation and launch campaigns to combat it and provide the populace with proven, reliable facts backed by actual research and science.
   4. The disinformation handled by the FACT will be on a variety of topics, including but not limited to: physical, emotional, and mental health; history; political concepts; science and technology; and various other topics.
   5. The information distributed by the FACT must be proven fact, either by scientific, historical, or general research from proven, reliable sources.
   6. The information may be in any form each individual member state's government pleases, whether it be by book, internet article, pamphlet, advertising campaign, television program, etc., as long as it is an efficient and effective method of spreading the information.
   • The criminalization of the deliberate, repeat spreading of harmful disinformation by a person, organization, or group of people.
     
     1. Punishment of an individual's violation of this ban will be decided upon by individual member state's government, whether it be by fines, incarceration, or community service.

[/list]

Hoping that these measures may combat the spread of harmful disinformation for the betterment of all member states' societies.

Combating Disinformation in Society

Category: Political Stability
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: The Orwell Society
Co-author: Cessarea

The World Assembly,

Discontent at the amount of disinformation on a variety of important topics that some member state's societies produce and distribute on a daily basis;

Knowing that said disinformation can be very harmful to society if believed to be true by a large part of the populace;

Determined to stop the spreading of injurious lies with the power of international law from this very Assembly.

Hereby enacts the following:

1. For the purposes of this resolution, “Disinformation," similar to misinformation, is defined as false, unproven, and/or inaccurate information intentionally produced and distributed. In this resolution, all disinformation mentioned is that of a harmful effect. The promoting of harmful disinformation can be defined as:
   
   1. a statement made by a person, organization, or group of people; that is
   2. falsely represented and stated with the intention of being believed to be a true fact;
   3. with the knowledge, from the person/people who made the statement, that the statement is factually untrue; and/or
   4. stated with a purposeful and reckless disregard for the statement's falsity; and
   5. is likely to cause harm to individuals; and/or
   6. is intended to harm the reputation and/or wellbeing of any persons, organization, or nation.
   7. Note that all disinformation in this resolution is harmful on an international scale, i.e. harmful to a significant portion of a member state's populace.
2. The establishment of the Forthright Association for Circulating Truth (shortened to FACT) to provide each memberstate with a force actively fighting against harmful disinformation.
   
   1. FACT will monitor leading sources of suspicious, unreliable, and/or outright misleading information.
   2. FACT will not interfere in anything directly relating to or affecting one's religious beliefs, including that in which a person/peoples believe to be true, but excluding that in which is already scientifically or historically established.
   3. FACT will locate the sources of the disinformation and launch campaigns to combat it and provide the populace with proven, reliable facts backed by actual research and science.
   4. The disinformation handled by the FACT will be on a variety of topics, including but not limited to: physical, emotional, and mental health; history; political concepts; and science and technology.
   5. The information distributed by the FACT must be proven fact, either by scientific, historical, or general research from proven, reliable sources.
   6. The information may be in any form each individual member state's government pleases, whether it be by book, internet article, pamphlet, advertising campaign, television program, etc., as long as it is an efficient and effective method of spreading the information.
3. The criminalization of the deliberate, repeat spreading of harmful disinformation by a person, organization, or group of people excluding that of religious nature.
   
   1. Punishment of an individual's violation of this ban will be decided upon by the individual member state's government.

Hoping that these measures may combat the spread of harmful disinformation for the betterment of all member states' societies.

Combating Disinformation in Society

Category: Political Stability
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Cessarea
Co-author: The Orwell Society

The World Assembly,

Discontent at the amount of disinformation on a variety of important topics that some member state's societies produce and distribute on a daily basis;

Knowing that said disinformation can be very harmful to society if believed to be true by a large part of the populace;

Determined to stop the spreading of injurious lies with the power of international law from this very Assembly.

Hereby enacts, in compliance with and subject to the provisions and mandates established by extant World Assembly law, the following:

1. For the purposes of this resolution, "disinformation" is defined as the distribution of claims or information that is manipulated or fabricated, entirely or partially fictional, or taken out of context for the purpose of deceiving its target - often the general public - by introducing false narratives into the public discourse, with the intention of agitating for violence or political action/support, usually in disfavour of a protected group or governmental effort. Disinformation must be:
   
   1. a statement made by a person, organization, or group of people; that is
   2. presented with the intention of being believed to be a true fact or a valid speculation or theory;
   3. with the knowledge, from the person/people who made the statement, that the statement is factually untrue; and is
   4. stated with a purposeful and reckless disregard for the statement's falsity; and
   5. is likely to cause harm to individuals, and/or
   6. is intended to harm the reputation and/or wellbeing of any persons, social group, organization, or nation.
2. Concomitantly, "misinformation" is defined similarly to disinformation, save for the sole and vital fact that it is spread without intent. The agent of misinformation has no malice and may earnestly believe that which they introduce into the public discourse. Agents that spread misinformation are - usually - informed by sources of disinformation. Due to its nature as a consequence of malicious acts, it is hereby established that:
   
   1. No individual shall be held criminally responsible for the spread of misinformation;
   2. Civil liability of an individual for misinformation is authorised, within the legislative bounds established by the World Assembly in regard to Civil Rights and Freedom of Expression;
   3. Misinformation presented by organizations, public or private, for-profit or not, from which a higher level of scrutiny and fact-checking is expected, is encouraged to be dealt with administratively and civilly, without criminal charges being levied against them;
3. The establishment of the Forthright Association for Circulating Truth (shortened to FACT) to provide each memberstate with a force actively fighting against disinformation and misinformation alike.
   
   1. FACT will monitor leading sources of false, manipulated, fabricated, fictional, unreliable, or misleading information.
   2. FACT shall not be responsible for denouncing or persecuting agents of disinformation, being tasked exclusively with the spread of truth and diligent research.
   3. FACT will not interfere in anything directly relating to or affecting one's religious beliefs, including that in which a person/peoples believe to be true, but excluding that in which is already scientifically or historically established. FACT will nevertheless advocate against calls for violence in disfavour of individuals, or groups thereof, regardless of belief.
   4. FACT will locate the sources of the disinformation and launch campaigns to combat it and provide the populace with proven, reliable facts backed by actual research and science.
   5. The disinformation handled by the FACT will be on a variety of topics, including but not limited to: physical, emotional, and mental health; history; and science and technology.
   6. The information distributed by the FACT must be proven fact, either by scientific, historical, or general research from proven, reliable sources. FACT shall ensure that a variety of sources are taken into account, and that differing versions of one topic are presented with neutrality, weighted by the preponderance of reliable, scientific evidence on the side of any given topic.
   7. FACT will distribute its research independently, by all means it deems reasonable, however individual member nation's governments can choose to specifically request and accommodate FACT within their nation. The information may be in any form each individual member nation's government pleases, whether it be by book, internet article, pamphlet, advertising campaign, television program, etc., as long as it is an efficient and effective method of spreading the information.
4. The criminalization of the deliberate, repeat spreading of harmful disinformation by a person, organization, or group of people.
   
   1. Punishment of an individual's violation of this ban will be decided upon by the individual member state's government.
   2. The criteria of knowledge and reckless disregard established by Article 1, paragraph b and c, must be proven materially. Malicious intent must be established beyond a reasonable doubt for criminal liability.
   3. A threshold for minimum legal relevance for criminal liability is furthermore mandated. Statements that attend to the essential qualities of disinformation as established by Article 1 must be further proven to have had significant impact within the proper context of the crime - local, regional, or national. Civil liability is unaffected by this requirement.

Hoping that these measures may combat the spread of harmful disinformation for the betterment of all member states' societies.

Combating Disinformation in Society

Category: Political Stability
Strength: Significant
Proposed by: Cessarea
Co-author: The Orwell Society

The World Assembly,

Discontent at the amount of disinformation on a variety of important topics that some member state's societies produce and distribute on a daily basis;

Knowing that said disinformation can be very harmful to society if believed to be true by a large part of the populace;

Determined to stop the spreading of injurious lies with the power of international law from this very Assembly.

Hereby enacts, in compliance with and subject to the provisions and mandates established by extant World Assembly law, the following:

1. For the purposes of this resolution, "disinformation" is defined as the distribution of claims or information that is manipulated or fabricated, entirely or partially fictional, or taken out of context for the purpose of deceiving its target - often the general public - by introducing false narratives into the public discourse, with the intention of agitating for violence or political action/support, usually in disfavour of a protected group or governmental effort. Disinformation must be:
   
   1. a statement made by a person, organization, or group of people; that is
   2. presented with the intention of being believed to be a true fact or a valid speculation or theory;
   3. with the knowledge, from the person/people who made the statement, that the statement is factually untrue; and is
   4. stated with a purposeful and reckless disregard for the statement's falsity; and
   5. is likely to cause harm to individuals, and/or
   6. is intended to harm the reputation and/or wellbeing of any persons, social group, organization, or nation.
2. Concomitantly, "misinformation" is defined similarly to disinformation, save for the sole and vital fact that it is spread without the understanding that it is false. The agent of misinformation has no intent to deceive or misguide and may earnestly believe that which they introduce into the public discourse. Agents that spread misinformation are - usually - informed by sources of disinformation. Due to its nature as a consequence of malicious acts, it is hereby established that:
   
   1. No individual shall be held criminally responsible for the spread of misinformation;
   2. Civil liability of an individual for misinformation is authorised, within the legislative bounds established by the World Assembly in regard to Civil Rights and Freedom of Expression;
   3. Misinformation presented by organizations, public or private, for-profit or not, from which a higher level of scrutiny and fact-checking is expected, is encouraged to be dealt with administratively and civilly, without criminal charges being levied against them.
3. The establishment of the Forthright Association for Circulating Truth (shortened to FACT) to provide each memberstate with a force actively fighting against disinformation and misinformation alike.
   
   1. FACT will monitor leading sources of false, manipulated, fabricated, fictional, unreliable, or misleading information.
   2. FACT shall not be responsible for denouncing or persecuting agents of disinformation, being tasked exclusively with the spread of truth and diligent research.
   3. FACT will not interfere in anything directly relating to or affecting one's religious beliefs, including that in which a person/peoples believe to be true, but excluding that in which is already scientifically or historically established. FACT will nevertheless advocate against calls for violence in disfavour of individuals, or groups thereof, regardless of belief.
   4. FACT will locate the sources of the disinformation and launch campaigns to combat it and provide the populace with proven, reliable facts backed by actual research and science.
   5. The disinformation handled by FACT will be on a variety of topics, including but not limited to: physical, emotional, and mental health; history; and science and technology.
   6. The information distributed by FACT must be proven fact, either by scientific, historical, or general research from proven, reliable sources. FACT shall ensure that a variety of sources are taken into account, and that differing versions of one topic are presented with neutrality, weighted by the preponderance of reliable, scientific evidence on the side of any given topic.
   7. FACT will distribute its research independently, by all means it deems reasonable, however individual member nation's governments can choose to specifically request and accommodate FACT within their nation. The information may be in any form each individual member nation's government pleases, whether it be by book, internet article, pamphlet, advertising campaign, television program, etc., as long as it is an efficient and effective method of spreading the information.
4. The criminalization of the deliberate, repeat spreading of harmful disinformation by a person, organization, or group of people.
   
   1. Punishment of an individual's violation of this ban will be decided upon by the individual member state's government;
   2. The criteria of knowledge and reckless disregard established by article 1, paragraph b and c, must be proven materially. Malicious intent must be established beyond a reasonable doubt for criminal liability;
   3. A threshold for minimum legal relevance for criminal liability is furthermore mandated. Statements that attend to the essential qualities of disinformation as established by article 1 must be further proven to have had significant impact within the proper context of the crime - local, regional, or national. Civil liability is unaffected by this requirement.

Hoping that these measures may combat the spread of harmful disinformation for the betterment of all member states' societies.

[Cessarea]

OOC: Haven't even read this yet, but I'd like to point out the hilarity of a nation named "The Orwell Society" to make a proposal titled "Combating Disinformation in Society". I hope this establishes a Commission of Truth! Apologies for the needless post, I just couldn't keep myself contained. Will read now.

[The Orwell Society]

OOC: Haven't even read this yet, but I'd like to point out the hilarity of a nation named "The Orwell Society" to make a proposal titled "Combating Disinformation in Society". I hope this establishes a Commission of Truth! Apologies for the needless post, I just couldn't keep myself contained. Will read now.

Lol, I understand the irony.

[Cessarea]

Councillor Feathers-of-Burgundy finishes consulting with his dedicated translator, to confirm that the name of the delegate's nation is indeed "The Orwell Society", before standing up to speak, casually organising a few handwritten annotations in his hand:

"Cessarea would like to, firstly, support this proposal ideologically. It is a commendable effort. Cessarea has reviewed previous WA legislation on the issue, primarily GA#644 and GA#436, which are related to freedom of the press and of expression, respectively. Neither impede the establishment of legislation that combats misinformation and misuse of those freedoms, and we are surprised that it has taken this long for such concerns to be raised on the floor of this Assembly. As for the draft itself, we have a few observations that we wish to share and possibly smooth out, in hopes of making a proposal that will succeed upon being presented before the General Assembly.

First, we would like the 'definition' and 'enacting' sections to be made into one, and for item '2' of the first section to be removed entirely. Item '2' is made implicit by the definition of 'harmful misinformation' presented, and is not needed. Furthermore, the presence of two instances of item '1', one for each section, would make referring to this legislation particularly difficult, justifying our wish to see that both sections are integrated into one. We would suggest that it be something along the lines of:"

The World Assembly, [...]
Hereby enacts the following:
1. The definition, for the purposes of this resolution, of "Disinformation", [...]

2. The establishment of the Forthright Association [...]

1. [...]
   a. a statement made by a person, organization, or group of people[...]
   e. is likely to cause harm to individuals specifically holding an arbitrary or reductive characteristic; and/or
   f. is intended to harm the reputation and/or wellbeing of any persons or nation.

"We would like for the phrasing on paragraph 'f' to include 'organisations', for the sake of consistency with paragraph 'a', as misinformation can be produced in relation to entities such as corporations or institutions. We would also like to question the reasoning behind paragraph 'e', and why was 'specifically holding an arbitrary or reductive characteristic' included."

1. The establishment of the Forthright Association [...]
   a. FACT will monitor leading sources of suspicious, unreliable, and/or outright misleading information that is widely believed as true.
   b. FACT will not interfere in anything directly relating to or affecting one's relig[i]ous beliefs, including that in which a person/peoples believe to be true. [...]
   d. The disinformation handled by the FACT will be on a variety of topics, including but not limited to: physical, emotional, and mental health; history; political concepts; science and technology; and various other topics. [...]

"Cessarea has a few remarks in relation to this item. It would be interesting to see a reformulation of paragraph 'a', given that combatting fringe misinformation is just as important as combating those fragments of such that are 'widely believed as true'. We believe that final statement can be cut entirely and would only serve to improve the proposal.

Paragraph 'b' has a spelling mistake on the word 'religious'. Aside from that, we believe that this exemption is far too unrestrictive at the present. If a religion is, say, to suggest that a planet such as Earth was created in a few hundred years, instead of the billion-year event that it was, that is misinformation and should be combatted as such. Belief must not replace hard fact in this regard. The existence of metaphysical gods is unfalsifiable, but the assertion that the Earth was made in a few thousand years is not, and must be treated as misinformation nonetheless. I would suggest, however, that misinformation based on religion can be exempted from criminal liability and punishment. FACT must combat it, but member nations must not be allowed to arrest their citizens for it.

We would also like to see the excerpt 'and various other topics' on paragraph 'd' removed. The paragraph already states the list is not exhaustive, and is only an exemplification, so the aforementioned quote is redundant."

1. The criminalization of the deliberate, repeat spreading of harmful disinformation by a person, organization, or group of people.
   a. Punishment of an individual's violation of this ban will be decided upon by individual member state's government, whether it be by fines, incarceration, or community service.

"Finally, we would like to suggest that the excerpt 'whether it be by fines, incarceration, or community service' be removed, as it suggests that individual members have to choose between these specific forms of punishment. Cessarea itself, for example, would probably enact punishment that relates to personality correction, when it comes to our primary machine species, the Artificials. That is, of course, a pedantic request, but one we find important nonetheless.

I would like to reiterate that Cessarea supports this in principle, and is grateful for your draft. We bid you luck in getting it passed through in vote, and hope that our critiques and corrections are taken into consideration."

The Councillor sits back down into his chair with a tired sigh. He spoke way more than he intended to.

[The Orwell Society]

OOC: Thank you very much for the feedback, I will address and implement it tomorrow.

[Astrobolt]

Ambassador Tappe: "Our office strongly opposes any international restrictions on speech past hate speech. A WA committee acting as an arbiter of the truth is completely unacceptable to this government."

[Barfleur]

"We strongly oppose this proposal, for reasons stated in prior drafts of this and similar proposals. We believe restrictions on speech should be absolutely minimal in nature and should narrowly target only the words which, taken in their context, tend to incite or facilitate unlawful activity. We remind the authoring delegation that all assertions which challenge an entrenched narrative are 'unproven,' right up until they are not, and indeed, often become the new narrative themselves. Civil defamation laws on the national level are more than sufficient to handle truly harmful false speech about others."

[West Barack and East Obama]

OOC:

Why does religion get an exemption from being fact checked? Given that disinformation is defined as something that's intentionally misleading and has a harmful impact, it seems fair and reasonable to regulate the many phony scams that persist in organised religions and cults.

[Cessarea]

OOC:

Why does religion get an exemption from being fact checked? Given that disinformation is defined as something that's intentionally misleading and has a harmful impact, it seems fair and reasonable to regulate the many phony scams that persist in organised religions and cults.

OOC: Yeah, I found this weird too. I pointed it out in my response, so I can only hope OP addresses that.

[Mlakhavia]

Our office strongly opposes any international restrictions on speech

The Mlakhavi representative, this time a painfully out-of-touch twenty-something street musician pulled from a street corner in Senzhete, discharges an e-cigarette in the general direction of Tappe. "Free speech is lame. Why do governments insist on protecting it?" They moan. "Speech is a weapon, far more powerful than any firearm. Firearms can gun down men. Speech can bring down governments. It should be treated and regulated as such."

[The Orwell Society]

OOC:

Why does religion get an exemption from being fact checked? Given that disinformation is defined as something that's intentionally misleading and has a harmful impact, it seems fair and reasonable to regulate the many phony scams that persist in organised religions and cults.

OOC: I’ve hopefully addressed that enough to where it won’t raise an issue, adding an exemption for the actually historical side of things

Councillor Feathers-of-Burgundy finishes consulting with his dedicated translator, to confirm that the name of the delegate's nation is indeed "The Orwell Society", before standing up to speak, casually organising a few handwritten annotations in his hand:

"Cessarea would like to, firstly, support this proposal ideologically. It is a commendable effort. Cessarea has reviewed previous WA legislation on the issue, primarily GA#644 and GA#436, which are related to freedom of the press and of expression, respectively. Neither impede the establishment of legislation that combats misinformation and misuse of those freedoms, and we are surprised that it has taken this long for such concerns to be raised on the floor of this Assembly. As for the draft itself, we have a few observations that we wish to share and possibly smooth out, in hopes of making a proposal that will succeed upon being presented before the General Assembly.

First, we would like the 'definition' and 'enacting' sections to be made into one, and for item '2' of the first section to be removed entirely. Item '2' is made implicit by the definition of 'harmful misinformation' presented, and is not needed. Furthermore, the presence of two instances of item '1', one for each section, would make referring to this legislation particularly difficult, justifying our wish to see that both sections are integrated into one. We would suggest that it be something along the lines of:"

The World Assembly, [...]
Hereby enacts the following:
1. The definition, for the purposes of this resolution, of "Disinformation", [...]

2. The establishment of the Forthright Association [...]

1. [...]
   a. a statement made by a person, organization, or group of people[...]
   e. is likely to cause harm to individuals specifically holding an arbitrary or reductive characteristic; and/or
   f. is intended to harm the reputation and/or wellbeing of any persons or nation.

"We would like for the phrasing on paragraph 'f' to include 'organisations', for the sake of consistency with paragraph 'a', as misinformation can be produced in relation to entities such as corporations or institutions. We would also like to question the reasoning behind paragraph 'e', and why was 'specifically holding an arbitrary or reductive characteristic' included."

1. The establishment of the Forthright Association [...]
   a. FACT will monitor leading sources of suspicious, unreliable, and/or outright misleading information that is widely believed as true.
   b. FACT will not interfere in anything directly relating to or affecting one's relig[i]ous beliefs, including that in which a person/peoples believe to be true. [...]
   d. The disinformation handled by the FACT will be on a variety of topics, including but not limited to: physical, emotional, and mental health; history; political concepts; science and technology; and various other topics. [...]

"Cessarea has a few remarks in relation to this item. It would be interesting to see a reformulation of paragraph 'a', given that combatting fringe misinformation is just as important as combating those fragments of such that are 'widely believed as true'. We believe that final statement can be cut entirely and would only serve to improve the proposal.

Paragraph 'b' has a spelling mistake on the word 'religious'. Aside from that, we believe that this exemption is far too unrestrictive at the present. If a religion is, say, to suggest that a planet such as Earth was created in a few hundred years, instead of the billion-year event that it was, that is misinformation and should be combatted as such. Belief must not replace hard fact in this regard. The existence of metaphysical gods is unfalsifiable, but the assertion that the Earth was made in a few thousand years is not, and must be treated as misinformation nonetheless. I would suggest, however, that misinformation based on religion can be exempted from criminal liability and punishment. FACT must combat it, but member nations must not be allowed to arrest their citizens for it.

We would also like to see the excerpt 'and various other topics' on paragraph 'd' removed. The paragraph already states the list is not exhaustive, and is only an exemplification, so the aforementioned quote is redundant."

1. The criminalization of the deliberate, repeat spreading of harmful disinformation by a person, organization, or group of people.
   a. Punishment of an individual's violation of this ban will be decided upon by individual member state's government, whether it be by fines, incarceration, or community service.

"Finally, we would like to suggest that the excerpt 'whether it be by fines, incarceration, or community service' be removed, as it suggests that individual members have to choose between these specific forms of punishment. Cessarea itself, for example, would probably enact punishment that relates to personality correction, when it comes to our primary machine species, the Artificials. That is, of course, a pedantic request, but one we find important nonetheless.

I would like to reiterate that Cessarea supports this in principle, and is grateful for your draft. We bid you luck in getting it passed through in vote, and hope that our critiques and corrections are taken into consideration."

The Councillor sits back down into his chair with a tired sigh. He spoke way more than he intended to.

The Orwellian Ambassador, whose name tag reads Ambassador Jayson Sharpe, back with a modified document and clears his throat. “We would like to thank the Cassarean Councillor for their feedback and ensures that it has been implemented wherever we saw fit. As the resolution you just read was authored more than a year ago by another ambassador with little changes, we are unable to fully explain the “specifically holding an arbitrary or reductive characteristic” part nor attempt to explain it as I have missed my morning coffee and am tired, but the statement has indeed been found unnecessary and has since been removed. Here is the updated draft with all of your criticisms addressed in full, and we thank you for your support.

[Maiseau]

Ambassador Blanchard: “We strongly oppose this proposal as an infringement on the fundamental right of all persons to free speech. The criminalization of ‘deliberate…repeat[ed] spreading’ of so-called ‘harmful disinformation’ is a totalitarian measure unbecoming of any free society. The Maiseauan delegation suggests that member-states wishing to establish a ‘Ministry of Truth’ do so within their own borders via democratic processes, and leave the freedom-loving people of the multiverse alone.”

[The Orwell Society]

Ambassador Blanchard: “We strongly oppose this proposal as an infringement on the fundamental right of all persons to free speech. The criminalization of ‘deliberate…repeat[ed] spreading’ of so-called ‘harmful disinformation’ is a totalitarian measure unbecoming of any free society. The Maiseauan delegation suggests that member-states wishing to establish a ‘Ministry of Truth’ do so within their own borders via democratic processes, and leave the freedom-loving people of the multiverse alone.”

"With all due respect, Ambassador, how is being mislead into believing that vaccinations cause autism 'freedom'?"

[Maiseau]

"With all due respect, Ambassador, how is being mislead into believing that vaccinations cause autism 'freedom'?"

“Freedom is the ability to discern for oneself what’s true and what’s not. A marketplace of ideas is certainly more free than a regulated flow of information.”

[Cessarea]

"With all due respect, Ambassador, how is being mislead into believing that vaccinations cause autism 'freedom'?"

“Freedom is the ability to discern for oneself what’s true and what’s not. A marketplace of ideas is certainly more free than a regulated flow of information.”

"And what - pray tell - has an unrestrained 'marketplace of ideas' done to the general health of democracies and civilised societies?" The Councillor questions, raising from his seat. "Have there not been several instances of Earthly governments being directly attacked by the fear and hatred caused by false information? Has the deity-like worship of 'freedom' not been used as an excuse to tacitly endorse misinformation and ignorance? The truth is, Ambassador, that Organics- I mean, Sapients, must be protected from the excessive flow of information present in a modern, interconnected society.

It is unreasonable to expect that the common worker - worried with the wellbeing of themself, their family, and their community - can distinguish false information from truth. Nevermind the factor of socio-economic disparity present in scarcity capitalist nations, and how the commoner is often the one with the least access to reliable means of factual information. Have you not to pay for the right to read a newspaper in such societies? Furthermore, religious belief can easily blind one into believing material falsehoods, such as the flat shape of a planet, or its impossibly young age."

Councillor Feathers-of-Burgundy shifts in place, pausing his monologue, before returning once more into speech: "Forgive me, Ambassador, but it would seem that your advocacy of 'freedom' is a tacit approval of brainwashing of the vulnerable masses."

[Barfleur]

A youngish fellow wearing a suit several sizes too big on him strides into the debating chamber, his papers held by an intern clearly struggling to keep his pace. "On reconsideration, we have reversed our earlier opposition and now wholeheartedly endorse this proposal. We have taken the liberty of declaring it a fundamental truth that all persons have the right to keep and bear arms and to own, profit from, and dispose of real and personal property as they please, and that any statement to the contrary is an attempt by the socioeconomic elites to strip the workers of the means of self-sufficiency. I am informed by my colleagues in Capinform that seditious works are already being compiled for burning, and that known purveyors of misinformation will face sanctions proportionate to their crime. May the Lady Violet continue to rain blessings down on all of us."

Once he is finished, he turns around and heads out, almost bumping into a breathless woman who has clearly sprinted down the corridor. "Delegates, delegates," she pants, "I have been sent to inform you that intern Frederick plans to... oh god, he's beaten me to it!"

Now out of the chamber, Frederick leans his head down to allow his intern to light him a cigar. Listening against the thick wooden door, he barely makes out the woman's faint voice: "well, I guess now we just have to go with it. I'll send a report to the Ambassador, let's see how he takes it..."

[Mlakhavia]

"With all due respect, Ambassador, how is being mislead into believing that vaccinations cause autism 'freedom'?"

“Freedom is the ability to discern for oneself what’s true and what’s not. A marketplace of ideas is certainly more free than a regulated flow of information.”

"Freedom ain't a universal principle, man." The Mlakhavi 'representative' says, in a slightly offensive mockery of a provincial accent. "What if somebody's freedom infringes on mine? What if they say shit to their friends to tell them they should make living the way I do a criminal offense? Even if that shit's all a lie? What if there's a buncha bastards running the media who agree with him, and tell all their journos to write about how I shouldn't be allowed to live my life? Is that freedom? Is it freedom to lie so hard you put others in jail? Nah. That's insanity."

[The Orwell Society]

“Freedom is the ability to discern for oneself what’s true and what’s not. A marketplace of ideas is certainly more free than a regulated flow of information.”

"Freedom ain't a universal principle, man." The Mlakhavi 'representative' says, in a slightly offensive mockery of a provincial accent. "What if somebody's freedom infringes on mine? What if they say shit to their friends to tell them they should make living the way I do a criminal offense? Even if that shit's all a lie? What if there's a buncha bastards running the media who agree with him, and tell all their journos to write about how I shouldn't be allowed to live my life? Is that freedom? Is it freedom to lie so hard you put others in jail? Nah. That's insanity.

The Orwellian Ambassador speaks up. "I'd never thought that I'd say this, but I agree with the communist. Total freedom is not something to pursue, as there's always more problems caused by total freedom of speech than there is with regulated speech. The Mlakhavi delegation raises some very fair points on the matter, and we thank them for their support."

[Wallenburg]

"Will we be taking schoolkids to trial for lying to their parents about eating the sugar cookies? How about day laborers who answer 'not bad' to 'how are you doing?' Perhaps we should make room in our jails to hold for trial all the spouses who lie about being sexually satisfied. But I know one thing for certain: my office will seek extradition so that our court may convict you and your office of disinformation for claiming all these things to be 'harmful on an international scale'."

[The Orwell Society]

"Will we be taking schoolkids to trial for lying to their parents about eating the sugar cookies? How about day laborers who answer 'not bad' to 'how are you doing?' Perhaps we should make room in our jails to hold for trial all the spouses who lie about being sexually satisfied. But I know one thing for certain: my office will seek extradition so that our court may convict you and your office of disinformation for claiming all these things to be 'harmful on an international scale'."

1. No
2. No
3. No

Not once in the proposal does it even begin to suggest that things that trivial would even begin to be brought to the attention of the FACT.

[Wallenburg]

Not once in the proposal does it even begin to suggest that things that trivial would even begin to be brought to the attention of the FACT.

"Not once in your proposal does it even begin to suggest that disinformation must be uncovered by the Ministry of Truth to be criminal speech."

[The Orwell Society]

Not once in the proposal does it even begin to suggest that things that trivial would even begin to be brought to the attention of the FACT.

"Not once in your proposal does it even begin to suggest that disinformation must be uncovered by the Ministry of Truth to be criminal speech."

OOC: I don't follow

[Cessarea]

"Will we be taking schoolkids to trial for lying to their parents about eating the sugar cookies? How about day laborers who answer 'not bad' to 'how are you doing?' Perhaps we should make room in our jails to hold for trial all the spouses who lie about being sexually satisfied. But I know one thing for certain: my office will seek extradition so that our court may convict you and your office of disinformation for claiming all these things to be 'harmful on an international scale'."

The Councillor convenes with a few of his adjutants, shakes his head, dismisses them, and readily raises from his seat to address the Wallenburg delegate:

"Your concerns are valid, delegate, but seem misguided given the text of this proposal. Article '1' would seem to indicate - per paragraphs 'd', 'e', and 'f' - that lying is not the same as spreading disinformation. The intent of that practice is to create false narratives with the explicit intent of damaging an individual's or a group's reputation and public well-being. If your spouse lies about being satisfied sexually, she would not causing any damage to your reputation or image, and would not be anywhere near being subject to the provisions of this proposal. If this spouse were to, say, spread a false narrative about how their significant other mistreats them, they would be a perpetrator of defamation, a type of crime that is already protected from exemption of free speech by GA#436, article '4'. That, however, would still not constitute a grave enough damage to the overall public discourse of a given nation to constitute 'disinformation', however defamatory it may be. I believe a reasonable interpretation of this proposal's article '1' makes that clear."

"If you are still worried about your spouse-" The Councillor stops himself, thinks, and continues, "about these minor lies, I would not be opposed to a provision added to replace paragraph 'g' of article '1', to further clarify that FACT's role and the subject of member nation's criminalisation of disinformation only applies to falsehoods sufficiently grave. There, we can include that criminalisation only applies to falsehoods that harm the political public discourse of a given nation, or that threaten the security of minorities, public health, and the general public understanding of science."

[Wallenburg]

"Your concerns are valid, delegate, but seem misguided given the text of this proposal. Article '1' would seem to indicate - per paragraphs 'd', 'e', and 'f' - that lying is not the same as spreading disinformation. The intent of that practice is to create false narratives with the explicit intent of damaging an individual's or a group's reputation and public well-being. If your spouse lies about being satisfied sexually, she would not causing any damage to your reputation or image, and would not be anywhere near being subject to the provisions of this proposal. If this spouse were to, say, spread a false narrative about how their significant other mistreats them, they would be a perpetrator of defamation, a type of crime that is already protected from exemption of free speech by GA#436, article '4'. That, however, would still not constitute a grave enough damage to the overall public discourse of a given nation to constitute 'disinformation', however defamatory it may be. I believe a reasonable interpretation of this proposal's article '1' makes that clear."

"This would be an accurate assessment were subsections c, d, e, and f all required components to disinformation. However, these are joined to the main section by the conjunction 'or', making only a single component among them necessary. By this choice of language, all lies are disinformation and deemed harmful on an international scale."

"If you are still worried about your spouse-" The Councillor stops himself, thinks, and continues, "about these minor lies, I would not be opposed to a provision added to replace paragraph 'g' of article '1', to further clarify that FACT's role and the subject of member nation's criminalisation of disinformation only applies to falsehoods sufficiently grave. There, we can include that criminalisation only applies to falsehoods that harm the political public discourse of a given nation, or that threaten the security of minorities, public health, and the general public understanding of science."

"Such vague standards as 'sufficiently grave' are only better than no standards at all by permitting member states not to enforce these inherently unadvisable sections."

[The Orwell Society]

“Would this issue be solved by omitting the clause regarding spreaders of disinformation becoming criminally liable? It’ll decrease the strength and effectiveness of this resolution, but if this is truly such a glaring issue, it can be considered.”