3 ms·
None of things you list here have anything to do with speech, though. Nor do they oppress the things you say. The point of parent’s comment is calling this opp
by beowulfey 3y ago
None of things you list here have anything to do with speech, though. Nor do they oppress the things you say.
The point of parent’s comment is calling this oppression of speech is incorrect, and I’d agree. Does that make this any less of a bad thing? In my mind, no! But lets argue for or against it on genuine terms.
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 3y agoIsn't tiktok a tool used for speech? If we take away phones, radios and TV is that blocking free speech? I can still technically go outdoors and shout but my reach isn't as far. I mean I guess I can technically still articulate my opinions without retaliation and legal sanction but I think this goes against the "censorship" bit if they take away our platforms.
- beowulfey 3y agoI don’t know. To me there is a difference in blocking a specific tool versus blocking a specific topic or phrase, which is what I would call censorship. Even the media type being blocked still has (albeit worse) alternatives; instagram, youtube, snapchat, and probably others have a similar format that could still be used. So it’s not really preventing us from using the “short clip” format for speech in general. Maybe I’m just old. But it feels disingenuous to call it an affront to freedom of speech. TO BE CLEAR, it’s not GOOD, and I don’t think it should HAPPEN. But it’s just weird to see the meaning of words shift before my eyes.
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 3y agoThat's fair. This act alone I don't think is an attempt to suppress American voices. It's wrong for other reasons. Still worried it sets a bad precedent for shutting down things they don't like.