8 ms·

PayPal Has Begun Quietly Shuttering Left-Wing Media Accounts

54 points by IdEntities 4y ago

polski-g 4y ago
States should start passing "must-bank" laws which require financial service companies to serve any and all clients unless ordered otherwise by a judge for criminal actions
tacitusarc 4y ago
Assuming no context is required other than the reporting here, this is rather disturbing. On the other hand, it’s hard for me to take the moral vicissitudes of jacobinmag regarding tech censoriousness seriously, given their coverage of Parler and related issues.
kstenerud 4y ago
Considering the places whose accounts are being shut down, I'm not surprised. A private company isn't going to want to end up on the wrong end of sanctions due to whom they're enabling. Places like Consortium News and Mint Press are pretty far out there with the conspiracy theories already, but the Russian propaganda would be what killed their accounts. All of these financial companies that don't have legal requirements otherwise use the same playbook: Be very trigger-happy, and have a boilerplate "go away" message that gives them maximum maneuverability and reveals no further information that would invite argument (the more their representatives talk, the greater the risk of legal liability). When I got booted from N26, I kept calling customer service to inquire about it until finally one of the operators broke protocol and told me that the rules require her to hang up on me the moment I mention the closure of my account (and then hung up, of course). It's nothing personal; they're just protecting their bottom line (which is why most financial institutions are bound by consumer protection laws).
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- raxxorraxor 4y ago
  A legal scholar in my country just argued that overblocking doesn't exist. I sometimes fail to imagine where these people live. Of course there are bad actors in the profession but from someone in a public position this came as a surprise. Without an ounce of predictability of legal decisions any provider will block generously, any half-arsed lawyer should know this. If our legal scholars are that dense or self-interested, I don't see how any provider could ever make sensible decisions.
fulafel 4y ago
Links to the mentioned news sites sites: https://consortiumnews.com/ https://consortiumnews.com/ & https://www.mintpressnews.com/ https://www.mintpressnews.com/
- seattle_spring 4y ago
  Those both seem to be on the same level as NaturalNews and InfoWars. In other words, I see no fault at all with PayPal's decision.
  - pessimizer 4y ago
    > Those both seem to be on the same level as NaturalNews and InfoWars. What does that mean in this context? Are you saying that the sites promote health quackery and bizarre theories about fake mass shootings, or is saying they're like NaturalNews and InfoWars just a way to say that you would like them banned because you disagree with their opinions (like you presumably disagree with health quackery and theories about Democrats being possessed by demons?)
  - skinnymuch 4y ago
    They aren’t alike at all. The listed sites spend actual legitimate effort with their organizations and the news they publish. The right wing sites you named are grifts. Not high effort passionate work. Your comment makes it seem more likely you disagree with left wing stuff.
    - jka 4y ago
      I don't like the content of articles like this one: https://web.archive.org/web/20220427155557/https://www.mintpressnews.com/cia-guantanamo-bay-torture-programs-mkultra-roots/280275/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220427155557/https://www.mintp... ...and I agree that the site may have (apparent or otherwise) biases. But the content reads true to me. I've seen and heard of previous examples of attempts to suppress and shut down publications or talking points that do indeed later turn out to have been accurate.
anm89 4y ago
Jacobin is an absolutely junk media source. It is left wing Breitbart.
- fulafel 4y ago
  It seems HN at least thinks Breitbart is much worse, if we compare the deadness ratios of the submissions: https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=breitbart.com https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=breitbart.com vs https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=jacobinmag.com https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=jacobinmag.com There are lots of jacobinmag.com submissions with lively discussions in comments as well, and not that many complaints about the reporting (comparable to the usual media sources).
  - pessimizer 4y ago
    They're like Breitbart because they disagree with Democratic Party consensus, not for any other reason. Everything that doesn't agree with this week's party line (even if that involves denouncing last weeks party line) is like Breitbart.
  - jwozn 4y ago
    This might be a symptom of jacobinmag being less well known. I had never heard of it prior to this post. I also think the discussion here is civil and most people seem to agree that the banning is justified. My experience with breitbart is that the articles are extremely flame-war-y
    - skinnymuch 4y ago
      Who is most people agree? There’s not a large sample size as you said. Left wing sites don’t have the same billionaire funding strategy as many major right wing sites including Breitbart. Breitbart doing lower effort grifting half the time is the opposite of Jacobin at the very least being clear the people running it are doing it with passion and their actual belief.
    - IdEntities 4y ago
      I haven't seen any solid case for the banning other than "sites shouldn't publish information which is embarrassing to NATO's efforts in Ukraine." Not one person has raised a factual dispute with anything published at either site.
mxmilkiib 4y ago
https://old.reddit.com/r/tankiejerk/comments/uhuaiz/jacobin_is_confused_why_paypal_isnt_honoring https://old.reddit.com/r/tankiejerk/comments/uhuaiz/jacobin_... On the subject of Russian propaganda; https://old.reddit.com/r/EuropeanSocialists https://old.reddit.com/r/EuropeanSocialists
simonblack 4y ago
I left Reddit after ten years because of unnecessary censorship. I happened to comment on a photo of an 'iron lung' on the front page saying that I hadn't seen one of those in over 50 years. The next day I saw that I had been banned from some obscure subreddit that I had never even heard of. Seems the subreddit with the photo on the front page was one of the pro-Trump subreddits. When I complained about that, my complaint post was 'disappeared'. If Reddit are going to be so up themselves, I can do without them. So I do. The land of 'free speech' isn't, as far as social media is concerned.
- Traster 4y ago
  Reddit is a super weird situation. If you take their policies literally, it's basically a site set up where sub-reddits are pure dictatorships. So in some ways it's perfectly pro free-speech, you can always make your own sub-reddit. But in other ways it's a completely totalitarian dictatorship with all of the larger sub-reddits run by a tiny cabal of very online people. There's no mechanism to appeal the decision of a sub-reddit, and since interacting with another sub-reddit is considered harassment or brigading you can't even talk about one sub-reddit on other sub-reddits.
  - none_to_remain 4y ago
    Nowadays the Reddit admins order the moderators around like unpaid employees and make the mods responsible for enforcing the sitewide rules.
  - darthrupert 4y ago
    Doesn’t it work like that in capitalistic democracy too? The nation is formed as a liberal democracy, but it specifically allows “subnations”, i.e. corporations, to be run with much more freedom. Almost all of them are run in a very authoritarian way. Some of those corporations are comparable to small nations in size and wealth.
sashenka 4y ago
No questioning the established narrative. The State Department is always right.

54 points by IdEntities 4y ago

States should start passing "must-bank" laws which require financial service companies to serve any and all clients unless ordered otherwise by a judge for criminal actions

tacitusarc 4y ago

Assuming no context is required other than the reporting here, this is rather disturbing. On the other hand, it’s hard for me to take the moral vicissitudes of jacobinmag regarding tech censoriousness seriously, given their coverage of Parler and related issues.

kstenerud 4y ago

Considering the places whose accounts are being shut down, I'm not surprised. A private company isn't going to want to end up on the wrong end of sanctions due to whom they're enabling. Places like Consortium News and Mint Press are pretty far out there with the conspiracy theories already, but the Russian propaganda would be what killed their accounts. All of these financial companies that don't have legal requirements otherwise use the same playbook: Be very trigger-happy, and have a boilerplate "go away" message that gives them maximum maneuverability and reveals no further information that would invite argument (the more their representatives talk, the greater the risk of legal liability). When I got booted from N26, I kept calling customer service to inquire about it until finally one of the operators broke protocol and told me that the rules require her to hang up on me the moment I mention the closure of my account (and then hung up, of course). It's nothing personal; they're just protecting their bottom line (which is why most financial institutions are bound by consumer protection laws).

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
raxxorraxor 4y ago
A legal scholar in my country just argued that overblocking doesn't exist. I sometimes fail to imagine where these people live. Of course there are bad actors in the profession but from someone in a public position this came as a surprise. Without an ounce of predictability of legal decisions any provider will block generously, any half-arsed lawyer should know this. If our legal scholars are that dense or self-interested, I don't see how any provider could ever make sensible decisions.

fulafel 4y ago

Links to the mentioned news sites sites: https://consortiumnews.com/ https://consortiumnews.com/ & https://www.mintpressnews.com/ https://www.mintpressnews.com/

seattle_spring 4y ago
Those both seem to be on the same level as NaturalNews and InfoWars. In other words, I see no fault at all with PayPal's decision.
- pessimizer 4y ago
  > Those both seem to be on the same level as NaturalNews and InfoWars. What does that mean in this context? Are you saying that the sites promote health quackery and bizarre theories about fake mass shootings, or is saying they're like NaturalNews and InfoWars just a way to say that you would like them banned because you disagree with their opinions (like you presumably disagree with health quackery and theories about Democrats being possessed by demons?)
- skinnymuch 4y ago
  They aren’t alike at all. The listed sites spend actual legitimate effort with their organizations and the news they publish. The right wing sites you named are grifts. Not high effort passionate work. Your comment makes it seem more likely you disagree with left wing stuff.
  - jka 4y ago
    I don't like the content of articles like this one: https://web.archive.org/web/20220427155557/https://www.mintpressnews.com/cia-guantanamo-bay-torture-programs-mkultra-roots/280275/ https://web.archive.org/web/20220427155557/https://www.mintp... ...and I agree that the site may have (apparent or otherwise) biases. But the content reads true to me. I've seen and heard of previous examples of attempts to suppress and shut down publications or talking points that do indeed later turn out to have been accurate.

anm89 4y ago

Jacobin is an absolutely junk media source. It is left wing Breitbart.

fulafel 4y ago
It seems HN at least thinks Breitbart is much worse, if we compare the deadness ratios of the submissions: https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=breitbart.com https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=breitbart.com vs https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=jacobinmag.com https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=jacobinmag.com There are lots of jacobinmag.com submissions with lively discussions in comments as well, and not that many complaints about the reporting (comparable to the usual media sources).
- pessimizer 4y ago
  They're like Breitbart because they disagree with Democratic Party consensus, not for any other reason. Everything that doesn't agree with this week's party line (even if that involves denouncing last weeks party line) is like Breitbart.
- jwozn 4y ago
  This might be a symptom of jacobinmag being less well known. I had never heard of it prior to this post. I also think the discussion here is civil and most people seem to agree that the banning is justified. My experience with breitbart is that the articles are extremely flame-war-y
  - skinnymuch 4y ago
    Who is most people agree? There’s not a large sample size as you said. Left wing sites don’t have the same billionaire funding strategy as many major right wing sites including Breitbart. Breitbart doing lower effort grifting half the time is the opposite of Jacobin at the very least being clear the people running it are doing it with passion and their actual belief.
  - IdEntities 4y ago
    I haven't seen any solid case for the banning other than "sites shouldn't publish information which is embarrassing to NATO's efforts in Ukraine." Not one person has raised a factual dispute with anything published at either site.

mxmilkiib 4y ago

https://old.reddit.com/r/tankiejerk/comments/uhuaiz/jacobin_is_confused_why_paypal_isnt_honoring https://old.reddit.com/r/tankiejerk/comments/uhuaiz/jacobin_... On the subject of Russian propaganda; https://old.reddit.com/r/EuropeanSocialists https://old.reddit.com/r/EuropeanSocialists

simonblack 4y ago

I left Reddit after ten years because of unnecessary censorship. I happened to comment on a photo of an 'iron lung' on the front page saying that I hadn't seen one of those in over 50 years. The next day I saw that I had been banned from some obscure subreddit that I had never even heard of. Seems the subreddit with the photo on the front page was one of the pro-Trump subreddits. When I complained about that, my complaint post was 'disappeared'. If Reddit are going to be so up themselves, I can do without them. So I do. The land of 'free speech' isn't, as far as social media is concerned.

Traster 4y ago
Reddit is a super weird situation. If you take their policies literally, it's basically a site set up where sub-reddits are pure dictatorships. So in some ways it's perfectly pro free-speech, you can always make your own sub-reddit. But in other ways it's a completely totalitarian dictatorship with all of the larger sub-reddits run by a tiny cabal of very online people. There's no mechanism to appeal the decision of a sub-reddit, and since interacting with another sub-reddit is considered harassment or brigading you can't even talk about one sub-reddit on other sub-reddits.
- none_to_remain 4y ago
  Nowadays the Reddit admins order the moderators around like unpaid employees and make the mods responsible for enforcing the sitewide rules.
- darthrupert 4y ago
  Doesn’t it work like that in capitalistic democracy too? The nation is formed as a liberal democracy, but it specifically allows “subnations”, i.e. corporations, to be run with much more freedom. Almost all of them are run in a very authoritarian way. Some of those corporations are comparable to small nations in size and wealth.

sashenka 4y ago

No questioning the established narrative. The State Department is always right.