3 ms·
It's comparable insofar as, in each case the sociopolitical temperature of the moment has resulted in a reduction of the content available to users, even if the
by jMyles 9y ago
It's comparable insofar as, in each case the sociopolitical temperature of the moment has resulted in a reduction of the content available to users, even if the actual dynamic varies in the important ways you point out.
- jerezzprime 9y agoBut one is through mandated censorship, the other is voluntary. YouTube decided to stop serving certain content to better serve it's customers, that is it's perogative as a business. Nothing is preventing a competitor from hosting such content.
- thrden 9y agoits hard to see that its anything but censorship when these platforms hold a pure monopoly on the space. If Gutenberg prevented anything displeasing to him from being printed, we would rightly see that as censorship. Further, censorship takes place in many ways only a small number are the result of state actors. In Mexico reporting on the cartels will cause them to target and perhaps kill you.
- smt88 9y agoIf you want to argue that a good defense against censorship is to prevent a single entity from having too much power, I agree.
- TeMPOraL 9y agoOne is mandated, other is voluntary, but they both reflect the same phenomenon happening in the society - that more and more topics are becoming "not acceptable" and thus get eliminated from popular areas on-line.