Mediaboss Marketing

Whether the candidate you supported for president won or lost, we all need to support the person chosen by the majority to lead this nation.

Columns share an author's personal perspective and are often based on facts in the newspaper's reporting.

Election day has passed, and by the time you are reading this, we should know who won the election. Whether the winner is the person you voted for, or his opponent, that person will be the president for the next four years.

I have been saddened at what I have seen posted on social media sites about candidates. I am not talking about candidate postings. I am talking about what my fellow MetroWest residents have been posting about candidates. Where has our sense of decency gone? Did we all forget that old adage that two wrongs do not make a right?

If you want to address an issue with a candidates position, or perhaps a statement on a topic you are interested in, then do that in a civil and factual way. What do you think you are accomplishing when you post memes that are derogatory about a candidate? Do you honestly think some meme is going to change a persons mind about the candidate they support? News flash, it will not.

We are a democracy, and many seem to have forgotten what that means. Let me remind you. Merriam-Webster dictionary defines democracy as government by the people: especially:rule of the majority; and a government in which the supreme power isvestedin the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held freeelections. I ask you to pay particular attention to the statement, rule of the majority.

There are so many issues facing this nation today. How we act on them will impact ours, our children's and our children's children's lives. Climate change, racial and economic equity, and reproductive rights are not new issues. We have been talking about and legislating them for years. We have seen the efforts on those issues sometimes take a course we are not happy with over the last few years. That simply means that those on the opposite side of these issues are now seeing their side lead, just as we saw our side do for a time prior to the last few years. That is what democracy does, gives us the right to choose to change our direction when the majority of the people feel the need for that change.

Let us all start leading by example. You want respect? Then be respectful of all others, even those whose political views we may find reprehensible. You want equality? Then treat every person you engage with as your equal, as someone who has just as much right to their opinion as you have to yours. You want change? Then work to build a coalition of like-minded people to do just that. You want to complain about an elected official? Then do that using facts and statistics.

For many of us here in MetroWest, the path our country has been on for the last few years is not the path we would choose. We need to remember that for the eight years prior to that, some of our friends and neighbors felt as we do now, that we were on the wrong path.

Fundamentally, we have seen our country shift on the ideals that for so long defined who we are. That shift will have consequences. What those consequences will ultimately be remains to be seen. A wise man once told me that nothing lasts forever, not even the bad stuff. So if you see what is happening as bad, hang on. Just like the weather, it will change soon.

The will of the people must be sacrosanct in all we do in order for democracy to work. Without that, we are not a democracy. Whether the candidate you supported for president won or lost, we all need to support the person chosen by the majority to lead this nation. While doing that we should concentrate on working for the betterment of all, and for the United States of America to be the shining light in the darkness that those who founded this nation designed us to be.

Stephanie Deeley is co-president of the League of Women Voters of Framingham.

Excerpt from:
Opinion/Deeley: In a democracy, the will of the people must be sacrosanct - Milford Daily News

By passing judgment on what's too unreliable to be seen, the tech giants are moving down a road that's rarely led anywhere good

Columns share an author's personal perspective and are often based on facts in the newspaper's reporting.

Democrats and Republicans alike missed the point on Wednesday, when members of the Senate Commerce Committee had their last chance before the election to grill the CEOs of Facebook, Twitter and Google. With the GOP on the hunt for partisan bias and the Democrats urging greater efforts to reduce misinformation, both sides ignored some fundamental principles of democracy.

The ostensible purpose of the hearing was to resume the argument over whether to amend Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. In truth, Republicans called the tech CEOs to press them on their handling of a controversial New York Post story that alleges wrongdoing by Hunter Biden, son of Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden. Democratic senators responded that the GOP was trying to "bully" the techies.

Well, goodness.

Let's start with a reminder that the social media companies are private enterprises, and even in the run-up to an election one might say especially in the run-up to an election they're clothed with a First Amendment right to curate content on their sites as they like. Yes, absolutely, one might sometimes wish that they acted in a more principled and even-handed manner, but did I happen to mention that they're private enterprises?

It's true that misinformation is rampant online. One is reminded of what Isaac Asimov called Gennerat's Law: "The falsely dramatic drives out the truly dull." There's a lot of the falsely dramatic floating around out there, and people tend to gravitate toward the bits that make the other side look worse.

Nevertheless, the tech giants, by passing judgment on what's too unreliable to be seen, are taking tentative steps down a road that's rarely led anywhere good. Even private restriction, although not matching any of the classic definitions of censorship, betrays a kind of hubris what John Stuart Mill famously derided as a belief in one's own infallibility. Worse, what tends to motivate the removal of bad information is a fear of the danger posed by whatever is being omitted or suppressed a worry about what might happen should the wrong people wind up seeing it.

The deep problem here isn't that the companies often act as though they're wearing partisan blinders. The problem is that even were the work done with perfect political neutrality, the determination to avoid the use of a platform to spread "misinformation" would still display the same basic attitude. When a platform spots a piece it considers suspect and its staff or review partners say, "Nope, can't let people see this," the unspoken message is, "We here at Twinstabook are clever enough to understand what's really going on. The people who rely on our platform aren't."

On issues from climate change to COVID-19, the social media companies often take the view that there are arguments too dangerous to allow their users to see. I agree that climate change poses a dangerous threat and that bad advice about the novel coronavirus could lead to a deadlier spread. But it's an enormous leap from holding a position, even passionately, to believing that others shouldn't be treated as wise enough to make up their own minds.

Yes, the public square is awash in misinformation. It has been ever thus. I'm of the generation trained to believe that the cure for bad information is good information. If people are sometimes persuaded by the false, that's a risk attendant upon the proper practice of democracy.

Nowadays, when we say "democracy" we almost always think of voting. But I cling to a classical vision in which voting is only one piece of what makes democracy valuable. More vital is acknowledging our joint participation, together with co-equals, in a common enterprise of self-governance; an enterprise in which we respect, among other things, the ability of our fellow citizens to decide for themselves which argument to accept. When a point of view is suppressed because those who hold the power to shape dialogue consider it wrong even dangerously wrong we're engaged in the opposite of democracy.

Censorship deprives individuals of the ethical right to decide for themselves what to believe. The fact that a private company has the unquestioned freedom to violate that ethical right doesn't mean that it should.

None of this means that I oppose efforts by social media companies to moderate content. Given the influence of their platforms, I think it's wise and good to edit out personal attacks, harassment, and the like. But the same reason the importance of the platforms forces me to conclude that the companies are mistaken in restricting points of view they consider wrong.

My libertarian soul fears any effort by government to impose on privately owned companies a different set of rules. And I'll grieve for true democracy if the social media giants continue to display so much faith in the ability of their own employees and partners to make decisions about what's true and what isn't and so little faith in the ability of the rest of us to make up our own minds.

Stephen L. Carter is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He is a professor of law at Yale University and was a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall. His novels include "The Emperor of Ocean Park," and his latest nonfiction book is "Invisible: The Forgotten Story of the Black Woman Lawyer Who Took Down America's Most Powerful Mobster."

View post:
Opinion/Carter: The opposite of democracy - Milford Daily News

The Editorial Board, USA TODAY Published 11:59 a.m. ET Nov. 7, 2020

Our View: Record high voter turnout fired Donald Trump amid a losing war on COVID-19, ousting an incumbent president for the first time since 1992.

All presidential elections are historic in their own way, but 2020 is truly one for the books. The turnout wasstupendous, the highest participation rate in more than a century.The result, a nail-bitingvictory for Joe Biden after days of vote counting, confounded pollsters who hadprojected a bigger Democratic wave.

Biden, who turns 78 on Nov.20, becomes the oldest person elected to the nation's highest office.His running mate, Sen. Kamala Harris of California, becomes the first woman and the first African Americanto be elected vice president.

Biden'swin, tighter in the Electoral College than in the national popular vote, showed that the majority of voters exhausted or enraged by the turmoil ofDonald Trump's first term were looking for a change. For the first time in 28 years, they ousted an incumbent.

They replaced the first president who had no prior public-service experience with a politicianwho has nearly a half-century of it. They replaced a narcissistic, indecent person with one who isknown for being unusually compassionate and caring. They replaced a dividerwith a uniter.

A decentpresident who respects the nation's democratic ideals is exactly what is needed at this point, with a nation split byTrump's reign of chaos and in the throes of a worseningpublic health emergency. "The purpose of our politics, the work of the nation, isnt to fan the flames of conflict but to solve problems," Biden said Friday night, striking an appropriate and healing tone.

Joe Biden speaks to supporters early Nov. 4, 2020, in Wilmington, Delaware.(Photo: Paul Sancya/AP)

As the election results showed, this remains a nation deeply dividedalong cultural and political lines. The fact that Trump almost pulled off a stunning upset shows that his brashness continues to resonatewith tens of millions of voters. It will not be easy for him, or them, to accept the loss.

And it will not be easy for Biden to govern. Depending on the results of two January runoff elections in Georgia, Republicans might wellretain a slim majority in the Senate. And even if Democrats reach50 seats there,some Democrats representing red stateswould likely balk at progressive ideas and nomineesvigorously opposed by Republicans.

Perhaps no other Democratic nominee besides Biden could have carried the crucial battleground state of Pennsylvania, where he was born. And perhaps more than anyone the Democrats could have fielded,Biden can bring his humanity to play in restoring some of the things that have been lost in this country in nearlyfour years.

Part of Biden's appeal is the things he won't do: attack doctors and scientists in the midst of a deadly pandemic;attack the integrity of our democratic institutions;profit off the presidency while withholding his tax returnsfrom the public; traffic in racist fearmongering; send unhinged tweets from the White House at all hours of the day and night.

But Biden perhaps can do more. There is a reason thatattempts to smear him fell flat. TheAmerican people know him well, and he has built up a reservoir of goodwill. He can use that goodwill to the national advantage.

The first order of business is to get America out of the hole it is in from the pandemic, which claimed 1,529 lives on Election Day alone, according to The COVID Tracking Project.Thismeans developing a coherent national strategy to contain the virus until a vaccine is ready, then building public confidence in a vaccination program. It also means another financialrelief bill,if not in a lame-duck congressional sessionthen early next year.

Another highpriorityis to restore America's tattered global reputation byrejoining the Paris climate accord, from which the United States officially withdrewWednesday.

Beyond that, thedetails of a legislative strategy can be worked out over time. For now, in many ways Americajust needs a return to the normality that previous presidents of both parties exhibited.

President-elect Joe Biden's victory representsthe political equivalent of Alka-Seltzer, a product introduced 11 years before hewas born. As the old commercial jingle put it: Oh, what a relief it is.

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/todaysdebate/2020/11/07/election-results-joe-biden-america-democracy-win-editorials-debates/6146002002/

The rest is here:
Joe Biden, democracy and decency win a presidential election for the ages - USA TODAY

President Trump speaks in the Brady Briefing Room at the White House in Washington, D.C. on Thursday. Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

President Trump speaks in the Brady Briefing Room at the White House in Washington, D.C. on Thursday.

Disinformation, foreign interference, a global pandemic and an incumbent president who refused to say he'd accept the results all were concerns headed into the 2020 election.

If those challenges were a test of America's democratic system, did we pass? Jelani Cobb of The New Yorker and election law expert Michael Kang weigh in, with Joe Biden on the verge of becoming the president-elect.

Listen to more election coverage from NPR: Up First on Apple Podcasts or Spotify The NPR Politics Podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify

In participating regions, you'll also hear a local news segment that will help you make sense of what's going on in your community.

Email us at considerthis@npr.org.

This episode was produced by Brianna Scott, Lee Hale, Brent Baughman, Jason Fuller, and Becky Sullivan. It was edited by Sami Yenigun and Sarah Handel with help from Wynne Davis and Arnie Seipel. Additional reported from Rob Schmitz and Daniel Estrin. Our executive producer is Cara Tallo.

Read the original here:
The 2020 Election Has Tested American Democracy. Are We Passing? : Consider This from NPR - NPR

To the Editor:

As the United States painstakingly counted its election ballots state by bloody state and agonized over the razor-thin margins between two presidential candidates, the rest of the world was bewildered and asking: Couldnt all this nonsense be avoided if there were no Electoral College and all we had to do was tally the national popular vote?

Ron A. VirmaniCharlotte, N.C.

To the Editor:

Many people have been asking how President Trump received so many votes, even after all of his gross incompetence during the past four years. People have also been lamenting that they dont know what America we are living in.

For answers, I suggest reading Caste: The Origins of Our Discontent, by Isabel Wilkerson. I have been doing so during the past two weeks and believe her thesis that Americas social structure is fundamentally a caste system to be quite compelling.

Elizabeth ZuchWhite Plains, N.Y.

To the Editor:

Re Exit Polls Point to the Power of White Patriarchy (column, nytimes.com, Nov. 4):

Charles M. Blow wonders why so many gay people, Black men and white women voted for President Trump, concluding that aspiration to power by proximity must be the reason.

An alternative explanation might be that many Americans, regardless of race, sexual orientation or gender, voted for Mr. Trump because they believed that he was better for the economy code for I fear losing my livelihood, my life savings and my ability to pay for health care more than I fear the virus.

Democrats need to do a better job of hearing those fears and crafting messages that speak to them. If Democrats had been able to persuade Americans that to rebuild our economy, we must control the virus first, there might have been more than a razor-thin margin between Joe Biden and the most corrupt, incompetent president in modern history.

Jane PraegerNew YorkThe writer is president of Ovid, a strategic communications firm.

To the Editor:

It is public knowledge that President Trumps hotels and golf courses are losing substantial amounts of money. Without the presidency to help support the occupancy and use of these facilities by those who would like to curry favor with the president, these facilities would be a financial disaster.

See original here:
Opinion | Democracy in America: Counting the Votes - The New York Times