World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
It's a bribe by another name.
It's not an illegal bribe, if we legalise it and call it lobbying. *taps head
But why do individual politicians or groups have the power to get these things through? Is it not subjected to a majority vote or something?
Because a free society does require the ability for citizens to petition their government (imo).
Corporate lobbying is just what happens when that's not properly regulated
In any parliament that does more than just rubber stamping whatever the executive does, you have committees that focus on specific topics. Members of Parliament specialise on some of those. There they actually draft stuff that then the full assembly is voting on. That is the only way it can work as you need people with some understanding on the topic to draft stuff. No person can be specialist in everything.
So you might have a few to maybe a few dozen people sitting in a committee. A few from each party and usually you also have at least obe person per party in charge of the topic for respective party. The Committee can not control the vote in the assembly (so it needs to keep in mind what the plenum will find acceptable) but it controls what the Plenum will vote on.
This is of course a great target for lobbying. However it dies not help on controversial issues where the Plenum will is ready to vote everything down.
because you need individual votes to make up any majority
So the lobbying is, in each particular instance, of potentially 100+ people (in the case of EU parliament 300 or so +), likely across parties? That seems difficult to organize, at first sight.
Lobbyists are people working on behalf of companies whose job is to meet up with politicians to discuss their issues. Typically that involves some back and forth that may or may not be considered bribery.
You want a law to protect your business? You go talk to lawmakers behind closed doors about how some laws are needed to better protect children and also data centers, and subtly let them know that maybe your company might have a job for them in the future.
Those lawmakers then go out and propose these laws and they sell the idea to other lawmakers who approve them for the children and datacenters.
So mostly not a consequence specifically of lobbying, if the majority votes due to actual conviction. Rather of disinformation/laziness, which will affect non-lobby initiated proposals too.
Lobbying on its own is not the issue. Nurses' lobbies and teachers' lobbies, for example, work for a good cause.
The issue is that lobbying is done in private, and citizens don't hear about anything until laws are proposed, by which time they already have momentum and are very hard to fight. And once laws are enacted, it's even harder to reverse them.
Yeah, it is indeed external influence which somewhat competes with democracy. What’s really bad is the reaching of consensus within the government via mostly trust in designated experts, instead of the voters individually studying the topic.