Did you hear about ABC cancelling “The View” for its chronic liberal bias? Or maybe the panelists are being replaced with conservatives. Come to think of it, perhaps only Whoopi Goldberg will be let go.

And there’s big news about Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce about to break up, or get married, or stay just as they are. Or, there’s the feud between WNBA stars Angel Reese and Caitlin Clark. Talk about a rivalry … Those would be mildly interesting news stories, except for one thing. None of the above is true. They’re just the kind of sludge you find in the daily deluge of dreck coagulating when you scroll through various newsfeeds.

For all its communication marvels, the internet makes possible the spread of information, real or fanciful, at lightspeed. Some of it is mistaken, some malicious, some is just publicity—and AI will make the bad stuff worse.

The Florida Legislature is wading into the sewers of computerized calumny during the 2025 session, and what we’ve seen so far seems sensible.

A bill by Tallahassee Sen. Corey Simon has drawn the most attention. Senate Bill 752 would require newspapers and broadcasters to take down stories from their websites when reliably informed that the items are false.

Fair enough. If some information is wrong and damaging to a person or business, why should anyone clicking a link find falsehoods? But then, should publishers, broadcasters or social media platforms be harassed by anyone who sees something they don’t like and alleges that some insignificant part of a story is wrong?

Simon’s bill was prompted by a Miami man who was accused of molesting a child at a pool party. He was cleared of the accusation and even won a defamation judgment against the people who’d accused him. Two TV stations complied with his request to remove stories about the incident. But another channel refused, citing a policy of not spiking news stories. There’s reasonable logic to that: The events did occur, and news about them remains online just like the information exists in the yellowed pages of an old newspaper.

It seems fair to require news sites to update stories that will be searchable forever. The fact that a person is acquitted ought to be in the story. But should government be the editor, or ethics arbiter, with power to order a newspaper, broadcaster or online site to take down information?

A far-simpler situation is addressed in a bill by Miami Sen. Alexis Calatayud, that would require internet platforms to remove “deep fake images” when told that pictures are forgeries. Senate Bill 1400 responds to the plight of a young Jacksonville woman whose face was put on the image of a nude woman and circulated online. That one’s a no-brainer. Not even the most radical First Amendment absolutist— e.g., every journalist in the business—would defend such libelous fakery.

But in dealing with government, journalism is like every other business, wanting to be left alone. We tend to view the First Amendment like the National Rifle Association sees the Second Amendment—it is perfect and just as vital to today as it was 250 years ago, and any restriction or regulation viewed with utmost skepticism.

The nation’s founders never imagined X, Facebook, TikTok, Instagram and Web sites flashing “content” worldwide with a keystroke. The colonials had their fakes and fraudsters but they also had dueling when a scurrilous lie besmirched someone’s good name. Legislators probably don’t want to go back to the good old wondrous ways of Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton, not that Florida’s modern gun laws are much better.

Still, it should be possible to let PR agents plant a little clickbait about celebrities and still make companies that run news websites take down damaging fake news.

Bill Cotterell is a retired Capitol reporter for United Press International and the Tallahassee Democrat. He can be reached at wrcott43@aol.com.