3 ms·

The problem is if you do set up your own website, a very small number of companies you choose from can each decide to deplatform you, and very soon unless you'r

The problem is if you do set up your own website, a very small number of companies you choose from can each decide to deplatform you, and very soon unless you're unusually technically savvy you will be unable to speak your message.

joe_the_user 8y ago
While I'd deplore everything about it, I would note that the most well American fascist website was online when I checked a moment ago. And I'd note that the effort deplatform that site occurred because it was quite well known and truly obscure publications are much less likely to get that treatment (for good or ill). Which is to say that net now certainly makes a wider range of views available to those interested than ever before. There's still individual apathy or skepticism keeping people from sample this Niagara but that doesn't seem like the worst. Many people like their platform filtering out racist garbage and hey, that seems like not entirely terrible. But the contrast is that in a small city in the US in the 1950s, a person would have to physically leave their location to get more "risque" or "extreme" publications of any political stripe.
- epicureanideal 8y ago
  Who knows though if it's left up at the request of law enforcement as a sort of "fascist bug zapper" where they get attracted to the electric light and then zapped. A few isolated examples of free speech being possible by highly undesirable groups doesn't necessarily mean what it looks like.
  - joe_the_user 8y ago
    I don't see a problem with law enforcement keeping their eyes on individuals who talk openly about committing heinous acts of violence, considering in the case of the current alt-right, this talk has boiled over to into vicious act of terror and murder (Portland, Charlottesville, etc). That free speech allows people who advocate crimes to be watched hardly by itself is hardly argument that this isn't really free speech. I mean, to some extent, I think it's OK fascist have some venue for their expression. That having such a venue should benefit them rather than being an opportunity for them to hoist themselves on the own petard really doesn't seem like something they can demand.
    - epicureanideal 8y ago
      I also don't have any problem with it. That wasn't my point. My point was, isolated instances of unacceptable opinions still having a platform isn't enough to prove that all unpopular opinions still have platforms available.

joe_the_user 8y ago

While I'd deplore everything about it, I would note that the most well American fascist website was online when I checked a moment ago. And I'd note that the effort deplatform that site occurred because it was quite well known and truly obscure publications are much less likely to get that treatment (for good or ill). Which is to say that net now certainly makes a wider range of views available to those interested than ever before. There's still individual apathy or skepticism keeping people from sample this Niagara but that doesn't seem like the worst. Many people like their platform filtering out racist garbage and hey, that seems like not entirely terrible. But the contrast is that in a small city in the US in the 1950s, a person would have to physically leave their location to get more "risque" or "extreme" publications of any political stripe.

epicureanideal 8y ago
Who knows though if it's left up at the request of law enforcement as a sort of "fascist bug zapper" where they get attracted to the electric light and then zapped. A few isolated examples of free speech being possible by highly undesirable groups doesn't necessarily mean what it looks like.
- joe_the_user 8y ago
  I don't see a problem with law enforcement keeping their eyes on individuals who talk openly about committing heinous acts of violence, considering in the case of the current alt-right, this talk has boiled over to into vicious act of terror and murder (Portland, Charlottesville, etc). That free speech allows people who advocate crimes to be watched hardly by itself is hardly argument that this isn't really free speech. I mean, to some extent, I think it's OK fascist have some venue for their expression. That having such a venue should benefit them rather than being an opportunity for them to hoist themselves on the own petard really doesn't seem like something they can demand.
  - epicureanideal 8y ago
    I also don't have any problem with it. That wasn't my point. My point was, isolated instances of unacceptable opinions still having a platform isn't enough to prove that all unpopular opinions still have platforms available.