4 ms·

I agree that we as society do not want to outsource censorship to private corporations. Despite that I still think this (namely deplatforming Parler in this mom

I agree that we as society do not want to outsource censorship to private corporations. Despite that I still think this (namely deplatforming Parler in this moment) is a better outcome for us. Amazon had to choose between appointing itself a censor or being complicit in fomenting violence via offering their services. Both choices suck, but that's sometimes the way cards lie. > once people who are plotting bad things all move to end-to-end encrypted platforms like Signal it will be that much more difficult to figure out who the bad people are. I think society's main problem here is the normalization of conspiratorial thinking and the radicalization that ensues. People have always been able to plot in secret and I'm not worried about law enforcement hypothetically being unable to monitor all wrong-thinkers thoughts in real time. In some respects I think this recent spate of censorious actions (Amazon, Apple, Google, Facebook, Twitter) could be the ideal outcome in that they've always had the implicit power to censor and the public has pretty much shrugged. If society is now forced to reckon with how much of public life it has ceded to Mr. Zuckerberg's whims all the better. If decentralization comes to the web, and tech monopolies and oligopolies are cracked open to competition I will shed no tears.

xxpor 6y ago
>I agree that we as society do not want to outsource censorship to private corporations This is how the US has worked for at least 100 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Association_film_rating_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Association_fil... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_blacklist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_blacklist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comics_Code_Authority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comics_Code_Authority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_Advisory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_Advisory From just off the top of my head
- thesteamboat 6y ago
  While I agree as a matter of fact that these organizations exist I was asserting a preference rather than an understanding of the world as it is. I view the above list ranging from misguided to shameful stains on our history. Further I want to draw a distinction between a rating group which certainly encourages censorship but does not have the ability or authority to carry it out and what we are seeing here. The Comics Code Authority worked by voluntary agreement of mainstream distributors and the underground comix scene immediately popped up to challenge it. The Hays code was enabled by a (IMO) bad supreme court decision and after that was overturned quickly crumbled to a more reasonable (again IMO) system of rating. The Parental Advisory labels, despite the intentions of their founders, were reduced to being audio nutritional fact boxes. Any traction they might have got was granted them by distributors like Walmart and collapsed shortly thereafter when the internet changed music distribution.
  - xxpor 6y ago
    And I think that all provides evidence that the absolutist view that cancel culture is a grave threat to freedom of expression is largely overblown. Things change over time in unpredictable ways, as long as it's not government enforced, ideas have a way of finding their way out there. It doesn't mean we have to make it easy as a society though. There will always be ways to find extremist literature if you want. It doesn't mean as a generic business owner I have to aid and abet it.

xxpor 6y ago

>I agree that we as society do not want to outsource censorship to private corporations This is how the US has worked for at least 100 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Association_film_rating_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_Picture_Association_fil... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_blacklist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_blacklist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comics_Code_Authority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comics_Code_Authority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_Advisory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parental_Advisory From just off the top of my head

thesteamboat 6y ago
While I agree as a matter of fact that these organizations exist I was asserting a preference rather than an understanding of the world as it is. I view the above list ranging from misguided to shameful stains on our history. Further I want to draw a distinction between a rating group which certainly encourages censorship but does not have the ability or authority to carry it out and what we are seeing here. The Comics Code Authority worked by voluntary agreement of mainstream distributors and the underground comix scene immediately popped up to challenge it. The Hays code was enabled by a (IMO) bad supreme court decision and after that was overturned quickly crumbled to a more reasonable (again IMO) system of rating. The Parental Advisory labels, despite the intentions of their founders, were reduced to being audio nutritional fact boxes. Any traction they might have got was granted them by distributors like Walmart and collapsed shortly thereafter when the internet changed music distribution.
- xxpor 6y ago
  And I think that all provides evidence that the absolutist view that cancel culture is a grave threat to freedom of expression is largely overblown. Things change over time in unpredictable ways, as long as it's not government enforced, ideas have a way of finding their way out there. It doesn't mean we have to make it easy as a society though. There will always be ways to find extremist literature if you want. It doesn't mean as a generic business owner I have to aid and abet it.