33 ms·
I've always found it funny how the most vocal detractors of deplatforming are generally right-learning politicians and pundits, some of whom have publicly state
by trutannus 5y ago
I've always found it funny how the most vocal detractors of deplatforming are generally right-learning politicians and pundits, some of whom have publicly stated how much they like Ayn Rand.
The irony here is that Rand pretty explicitly supports the right to deplatform people in The Virtue of Selfishness. Up until recently it was a common attitude in conservative political circles that forcing someone to publish content they disagreed with was itself the violation of a right. See below:
"The right of free speech means that a man has the right to express his ideas without danger of suppression, interference or punitive action by the government. It does not mean that others must provide him with a lecture hall, a radio station or a printing press through which to express his ideas. Any undertaking that involves more than one man, requires the voluntary consent of every participant. Every one of them has the right to make his own decision, but none has the right to force his decision on the others."
I struggle to find a single source that the American right likes to cite which would go in the opposite direction, given that more right-leaning conceptualizations of rights tends to be a freedom from as opposed to a freedom to right. Given this framework, social media companies have a freedom from providing a platform for ideas they find objectionable.
- BitwiseFool 5y agoUltimately, I think right-leaning politicians want to ban deplatforming because deplatforming works and they have the most to lose from it. I see this as practical political calculus and a fight for survival rather than some ideological exercise.
- trutannus 5y agoAbsolutely, that's what it actually is. That said, they do tend to sell it as an ideological exercise in "free speech suppression". Pointing this out is important anyway to make sure that people realize they're being bamboozled by some political strategy and not a genuine attack on their rights.
- ttt0 5y agoSo does deplatforming work or is it just a myth, like some people say?
- 8fGTBjZxBcHq 5y agoThis apparent contradiction is just a moderately clever way of using an ambiguity in the word. If "deplatforming" is taken to mean "depriving people of an easy means to find and communicate to an audience" it can be an effective technique depending on context, alternative communication channels, etc. If "deplatforming" is taken to mean "a novel social ill based on depriving people of their right to communicate" then yeah it's a myth.
- ttt0 5y agoThat's basically the same thing. The purpose of doing the former is the latter, since everyone does it. Free speech is like encryption at this point. Sure, it's not technically illegal, but if you actually try to do something for the public to use then the system will find some way to make it impossible and shut you down.
- 8fGTBjZxBcHq 5y agoNo the second embeds two important differences from the first: that this is new (it's as old as writing at least) and that it's bad (a value judgement you can fall on either side of).
- ttt0 5y agoSo to summarize, deplatforming is real, but it's a myth that it's a bad thing. Got it.
- 8fGTBjZxBcHq 5y agoCorrect!
- ThrowawayR2 5y ago> "Ultimately, I think right-leaning politicians want to ban deplatforming because deplatforming works and they have the most to lose from it." If deplatforming worked, the LGBTQ rights movement would have failed because they were kept in the closet. Deplatforming does not work, particularly in an era where "The 'Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it."
- BitwiseFool 5y agoCensorship cannot eliminate an idea, but deplatforming succeeds with the goal of severely limiting the spread of ideas and controlling discourse. One can argue the Donald Trump has "routed around" being banned from Twitter and Facebook with his mini-blog on his personal website but that is nowhere near as effective of a communication tool as his old social media presence. I also assert that "The 'Net" of today is a much different one than that inspired John Gilmore's quote, as non-censoring alternatives to Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube have failed to gain much traction.
- jfengel 5y agoIt is practical political calculus, but not necessarily because it works. It may be because objecting to deplatforming is more benefit than the actual deplatforming. A prominent politician does not lack means for getting their message out. If anything, being banned from a social media site provides free airtime on conventional media as they talk about it. It's unclear whether the net effect is positive, negative, or otherwise. But it is clear that riling up people with talk about "deplatforming" is pretty effective. And, at least for the past couple of decades, riling up their constituency has been a fairly effective political tactic.