3 ms·
The link is just an example of how some speech is bad. The point of the original comment was that badness should be determined by laws, and not by the moderati
by nemetroid 6y ago
The link is just an example of how some speech is bad.
The point of the original comment was that badness should be determined by laws, and not by the moderation policies of private companies. I don’t see how the linked article forms an argument for or against that position.
- turndown 6y agoThe link provides a clear example of where this policy fails: false statements about the Tutsi & other ethnic groups lead to a genocide. None of this was illegal within the definition of free speech in Rwanda - as far as I am aware - thus providing an example where only moderating content on its basis of legality fails. As a cherry on top, the link also mentions that the radio station was actually endorsed by the government and provided equipment to them. Should the law be the best basis for moderation when the morality of those writing the laws cannot be spoken for?