I think mandated information disclosure is extremely important in a capitalist system. How can we make good decisions if we don't have good information? We need to ask more questions, trust, but verify. We do pass laws that require those that sell products and services to disclose X, Y and Z for their products in a standardized and uniform manner. Likewise, we should be skeptical and critical about what others are telling us.
Information that's not tied to such a simple tit for tat relationship gets in the weeds though. How do you define "misinformation" as it pertains to your mother on someone's feed? You can claim and sue for damages and if a judge and jury find your case, then that's what it is, but mandating strict systematic moderation of all internet users on social media is not the same as mandating information disclosure for the Kellogs or IKEAs of the world. We've decided that Horseradish dyed green can be sold as Wasabi on the ingredients list. This is officially supported misinformation right?
In this instance, election denial is almost complete idiocy, yes, but barring "election denial" wholesale is a terrible thing to do. Your questions are quite leading too. We need more discussion around these topics, not less. I've talked election deniers off their stupid cliffs before. When SCOTUS shot down the Bush v. Gore recount decades ago, Americans had reason to be upset and talk about it. Would it have been more unifying if everyone had just bowed their heads, quickly and quietly, accepting the results without fuss, sure...
Censorship is a great tool for quelling public dissent. It's a shortcut around reason though and we've built up these tribal walls that preclude solving problems together. If quieting dissenters is the thing you want to maximize, you'll do great with it. We're not the only ones chomping at the bit to censor those that disagree with us, but I guess be careful what you wish for.
