4 ms·

> What would that look like though? Certainly not through 1000 Netflix employees representing the free-market.

by anonu 5y ago

danShumway 5y ago
Should 1000 Netflix employees be able to represent what content Netflix hosts? Netflix refuses to carry an awful lot of content. Is it a violation of the free market of speech that they're not streaming everyone else's responses to David Chappelle? I mean, I personally haven't been contacted by them to make a video with them about this debate, does that mean Netflix is censoring my voice and subverting the marketplace of ideas by refusing to stream my videos? The problem is that if we go too far down the road of deciding Netflix is violating the marketplace of ideas by choosing not to host certain ideas on a curated service, we end up with really silly conclusions. I'd be a bit more charitable to this idea if we were talking about a general platform like Youtube, or if we were talking about a platform with outsized monopoly-levels of control over video content. But it's absurd to say that the marketplace of ideas means Netflix is obligated to pay people to produce content for them and to promote that content; that would be a huge violation of Freedom of Association, and it would just be completely unworkable as a business model. And if Netflix isn't obligated to pay for and host everyone's content, then who else has more right to have input into what Netflix does host than its employees, owners, and stakeholders?
- rsj_hn 5y ago
  > I mean, I haven't been contacted by them to make a video with them Consider -- just for a moment -- that you are not Dave Chappelle. But if you were an entertainer with his appeal and fanbase, then I don't doubt that Netflix would reach out to you to try to sign you to some specials. In other words, Netflix is not a pez-dispenser of views on political issues. It's an entertainment platform for the entire world. So no, extremist groups within Netflix don't get to stand between Chapelle and his audience, deplatforming him just because they have a job at Netflix.
  - danShumway 5y ago
    > But if you were an entertainer with his appeal and fanbase And who decides what that line is? Netflix, right? Netflix ultimately gets to decide what its standards are for the content it hosts, that's the only sensible conclusion we can draw. It's the only setup that makes sense in a free market, companies get to choose what products they produce and host. Similarly, Netflix can look at feedback from its customers and other clients, and it can look at feedback from its workers, and it can take that feedback into account when making decisions. Just like it does for literally every other business decision that it makes.
    - rsj_hn 5y ago
      > Similarly, Netflix can look at feedback from its customers and other clients Yes. And I got news for you -- the rest of the world thinks these Netflix protestors are crazy, power hungry authoritarians. This special is popular, as is Chapelle. > it can look at feedback from its workers, In terms of what netflix shows, workers are not more privileged than any other netflix customer, unless they are the ones hired by Netflix to select content. If you want a collective editorialship role, then go to work for a cooperative, or seek a job with that role. But if you accepted a job as release engineer, then no, you don't get to decide which comedians Netflix signs just because you are a release engineer for Netflix. That's something that workers know when they sign on.
      - danShumway 5y ago
        > But if you accepted a job as release engineer, then no, you don't get to decide which comedians Netflix shows just because you are a release engineer for Netflix. Do the workers get to decide whether they work for Netflix? If, theoretically, they threatened to stop working, would that fall within the bounds of their freedom of association under the 1st Amendment?
        rsj_hn 5y ago
        They can leave, sure. I don't think they have a right to "threaten" anyone, and they certainly don't have a right to strike, not being in a union or even trying to form a union. They could however form a union first and demand a labor contract in which every Netflix employee has the right to veto content shown on Netflix. Then they could go on strike if the union fails to agree on a contract, saying that this "right to deplatform" is a non-negotiable demand. That is the equivalent of what is going on here, which should explain why the rest of the world thinks this is a terrible idea. Anyways, good luck with that.

> What would that look like though? Certainly not through 1000 Netflix employees representing the free-market.

by anonu 5y ago

> What would that look like though? Certainly not through 1000 Netflix employees representing the free-market.

Should 1000 Netflix employees be able to represent what content Netflix hosts? Netflix refuses to carry an awful lot of content. Is it a violation of the free market of speech that they're not streaming everyone else's responses to David Chappelle? I mean, I personally haven't been contacted by them to make a video with them about this debate, does that mean Netflix is censoring my voice and subverting the marketplace of ideas by refusing to stream my videos? The problem is that if we go too far down the road of deciding Netflix is violating the marketplace of ideas by choosing not to host certain ideas on a curated service, we end up with really silly conclusions. I'd be a bit more charitable to this idea if we were talking about a general platform like Youtube, or if we were talking about a platform with outsized monopoly-levels of control over video content. But it's absurd to say that the marketplace of ideas means Netflix is obligated to pay people to produce content for them and to promote that content; that would be a huge violation of Freedom of Association, and it would just be completely unworkable as a business model. And if Netflix isn't obligated to pay for and host everyone's content, then who else has more right to have input into what Netflix does host than its employees, owners, and stakeholders?

rsj_hn 5y ago
> I mean, I haven't been contacted by them to make a video with them Consider -- just for a moment -- that you are not Dave Chappelle. But if you were an entertainer with his appeal and fanbase, then I don't doubt that Netflix would reach out to you to try to sign you to some specials. In other words, Netflix is not a pez-dispenser of views on political issues. It's an entertainment platform for the entire world. So no, extremist groups within Netflix don't get to stand between Chapelle and his audience, deplatforming him just because they have a job at Netflix.
- danShumway 5y ago
  > But if you were an entertainer with his appeal and fanbase And who decides what that line is? Netflix, right? Netflix ultimately gets to decide what its standards are for the content it hosts, that's the only sensible conclusion we can draw. It's the only setup that makes sense in a free market, companies get to choose what products they produce and host. Similarly, Netflix can look at feedback from its customers and other clients, and it can look at feedback from its workers, and it can take that feedback into account when making decisions. Just like it does for literally every other business decision that it makes.
  - rsj_hn 5y ago
    > Similarly, Netflix can look at feedback from its customers and other clients Yes. And I got news for you -- the rest of the world thinks these Netflix protestors are crazy, power hungry authoritarians. This special is popular, as is Chapelle. > it can look at feedback from its workers, In terms of what netflix shows, workers are not more privileged than any other netflix customer, unless they are the ones hired by Netflix to select content. If you want a collective editorialship role, then go to work for a cooperative, or seek a job with that role. But if you accepted a job as release engineer, then no, you don't get to decide which comedians Netflix signs just because you are a release engineer for Netflix. That's something that workers know when they sign on.
    - danShumway 5y ago
      > But if you accepted a job as release engineer, then no, you don't get to decide which comedians Netflix shows just because you are a release engineer for Netflix. Do the workers get to decide whether they work for Netflix? If, theoretically, they threatened to stop working, would that fall within the bounds of their freedom of association under the 1st Amendment?
      - rsj_hn 5y ago
        They can leave, sure. I don't think they have a right to "threaten" anyone, and they certainly don't have a right to strike, not being in a union or even trying to form a union. They could however form a union first and demand a labor contract in which every Netflix employee has the right to veto content shown on Netflix. Then they could go on strike if the union fails to agree on a contract, saying that this "right to deplatform" is a non-negotiable demand. That is the equivalent of what is going on here, which should explain why the rest of the world thinks this is a terrible idea. Anyways, good luck with that.