3 ms·

I will pay money to anyone who resists censorship. I don’t give a fuck if it’s “misinformation“ as those who classify what is right and wrong are a big part of

I will pay money to anyone who resists censorship. I don’t give a fuck if it’s “misinformation“ as those who classify what is right and wrong are a big part of the problem. I worked at a media company and we had a substantial reach and liberal bias. We were a propaganda machine.

petee 5y ago
So you're ok paying to platform a Nazi group, personally? I know everyone hates the comparison, but they do still exist, and spew filth, though their 1st amendment right to. What about rumor of the pedophile ring out of the pizza joint in Washington? Is it really worth giving large voice to just any old trash, just for 'the cause'? And its not censorship. Its their soapbox, they can do what they want. You can always start your own soap box. Per my example above, you shouldn't have to pay money to support voices that you fundamentally disagree with, nor work for.
- version_five 5y ago
  Godwin
  - petee 5y ago
    I know, I know :) I couldn't help it
- __blockcipher__ 5y ago
  Customers are always free to leave. Nobody is forcing someone to pay for spotify so your argument is absurd on its face.
  - toomuchtodo 5y ago
    I find it difficult to argue for absolute speech freedom when people are dying on ventilators or poisoning their grandchildren with ivermectin from misinformation. “Yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire” sort of thing. There is no expectation or obligation of free speech on a private platform. Censorship arguments ring hollow when outright lies are weaponized and causing measurable, real harm.
    - __blockcipher__ 5y ago
      Who here is arguing that private businesses can’t deplatform? I’m arguing that they shouldn’t, not that they can’t. I’m not going to bite on the ivermectin/ventilator stuff because it’s just completely absurd. BTW the way you used the “it’s easy to argue” construction backwards.
      - toomuchtodo 5y ago
        If you believe facts and verifiable events (that are trivially cited from multiple, reliable news organizations) are absurd, but also don’t believe misinformation that causes those very events shouldn’t be deplatformed, how can your arguments carry any validity? If your desire is to ignore the facts and instead yell into the void a position without substantiation (“no deplatforming! carry All The Speach Regardless of Content!), that sounds unlikely to persuade. I mean, you know they moderate this place too? Simply turn on “showdead” in your profile to see the deplatformed.
        josephcsible 5y ago
        > Simply turn on “showdead” in your profile to see the deplatformed. You have to jump through an extra hoop to see them at all, and you can't interact with them.
  - petee 5y ago
    I mean, thats my point; if you could elaborate, because i'm not sure how that is absurd? Customers also are free to tell Spotify they aren't happy with the service before they leave. And then its Spotify's choice to either make their current customers happy, or try to welcome new ones to replace their cash.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

petee 5y ago

So you're ok paying to platform a Nazi group, personally? I know everyone hates the comparison, but they do still exist, and spew filth, though their 1st amendment right to. What about rumor of the pedophile ring out of the pizza joint in Washington? Is it really worth giving large voice to just any old trash, just for 'the cause'? And its not censorship. Its their soapbox, they can do what they want. You can always start your own soap box. Per my example above, you shouldn't have to pay money to support voices that you fundamentally disagree with, nor work for.

version_five 5y ago
Godwin
- petee 5y ago
  I know, I know :) I couldn't help it
__blockcipher__ 5y ago
Customers are always free to leave. Nobody is forcing someone to pay for spotify so your argument is absurd on its face.
- toomuchtodo 5y ago
  I find it difficult to argue for absolute speech freedom when people are dying on ventilators or poisoning their grandchildren with ivermectin from misinformation. “Yelling fire in a crowded theater when there is no fire” sort of thing. There is no expectation or obligation of free speech on a private platform. Censorship arguments ring hollow when outright lies are weaponized and causing measurable, real harm.
  - __blockcipher__ 5y ago
    Who here is arguing that private businesses can’t deplatform? I’m arguing that they shouldn’t, not that they can’t. I’m not going to bite on the ivermectin/ventilator stuff because it’s just completely absurd. BTW the way you used the “it’s easy to argue” construction backwards.
    - toomuchtodo 5y ago
      If you believe facts and verifiable events (that are trivially cited from multiple, reliable news organizations) are absurd, but also don’t believe misinformation that causes those very events shouldn’t be deplatformed, how can your arguments carry any validity? If your desire is to ignore the facts and instead yell into the void a position without substantiation (“no deplatforming! carry All The Speach Regardless of Content!), that sounds unlikely to persuade. I mean, you know they moderate this place too? Simply turn on “showdead” in your profile to see the deplatformed.
      - josephcsible 5y ago
        > Simply turn on “showdead” in your profile to see the deplatformed. You have to jump through an extra hoop to see them at all, and you can't interact with them.
- petee 5y ago
  I mean, thats my point; if you could elaborate, because i'm not sure how that is absurd? Customers also are free to tell Spotify they aren't happy with the service before they leave. And then its Spotify's choice to either make their current customers happy, or try to welcome new ones to replace their cash.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]