3 ms·
People will always find a way around these rules. Any free social network is going to inevitably end up with groups using it for nefarious reasons. Banning hash
by jpxw 7y ago
People will always find a way around these rules. Any free social network is going to inevitably end up with groups using it for nefarious reasons. Banning hashtags seems like it’s attempting to attack a symptom of the problem rather than the problem itself, too.
Presumably they are doing this because of pressure from advertisers. I’m not sure why they care so much. I can somewhat understand why they care about YouTube, where their money (indirectly) goes to the creator making the content they disagree with, but on Instagram that isn’t the case.
- cookie_monsta 7y agoMaybe they feel some sense of responsibility that their platform is getting used to push dangerous stupidity (just a theory).
- jpxw 7y agoMaybe I’m cynical, but Instagram is a profit-making enterprise, and I imagine that that is the foremost driver of these decisions
- cookie_monsta 7y agoMaybe I'm overly idealistic but I can imagine a time when having a corporate identity and not trying to be everything to everybody might actually become an attractive USP among the platforms
- jpxw 7y agoI mean the business model of a free social network is inherently dodgy. Unless you think people will be willing to move to a subscription model or something
- cookie_monsta 7y agoI'm not sure how your second sentence follows from your first. Advertisers have long distanced themselves from toxic mediums. Once the tide turns on the definition of toxic the platforms may fall in line. I believe Twitter moved in that direction with banning political ads.
- fungicide 7y agoI think it's probably virtue signalling rather than appeasement. Advertises probably welcome anti-vaxers as they are demonstrably gullible and easy to persuade.