4 ms·
Freedom of speech isn't just about what the government does. We can dislike a platform because it's a poor means of expression and urge people to stop using it
by vorpalhex 3y ago
Freedom of speech isn't just about what the government does.
We can dislike a platform because it's a poor means of expression and urge people to stop using it.
- lolinder 3y agoDislike away, but don't justify your dislike of a specific UX using the language of human rights abuse. An app kind of sucking is not a humanitarian crisis.
- User23 3y agoAccessibility is one obvious counter-example of where a specific UX “kind of sucking” can in fact be a humanitarian crisis, albeit one that disproportionately affects disabled persons. Fortunately we have laws on the books for that and people have sued and won.
- lolinder 3y agoI'll grant that, but that still doesn't excuse OP making it sound like this UX issue is about freedom of expression. I'd readily believe that Instagram's UX is bad for screen readers.
- prepend 3y agoUX that limits expression (not linking urls, not allowing some speech) is just that. These apps limit expression because it makes them more money. But they still limit expression. Instagram doesn’t want you linking out of instagram so you stay and view more ads. Tiktok bans for off site bios because it wants less controversy so they sell more ads. Etc etc.
- akerl_ 3y agoBy this logic, a forum for cooking that doesn’t permit discussion of biking is “limiting expression”. As is a restaurant that doesn’t let me stand up and start singing in their dining room. Being a private entity that allows users to express themselves isn’t a restriction on the types of expression you don’t allow. The default is that Instagram doesn’t exist, not that it exists and must all anything you want it to.
- prepend 3y agoIt is limiting expression. Just like removing spam. Or HN not allowing personal attacks. The question is the extent of the limitation. And what’s “reasonable.”
- akerl_ 3y agoIf I sell you a burger, I haven’t limited your dinner. Instagram offers what they offer. A forum for a topic or a medium offers something to you. The fact that they’ve chosen not to offer other things isn’t a limitation on your expression, any more than my burger shop is for not selling salads.
- vorpalhex 3y agoAnd we're allowed to say Instagram is a bad burger shop, we don't like their burgers and we don't want to buy their burgers. We can choose to do business with someone else, and make use social pressure on the people who still use Instagram. We don't owe Instagram some sort of being nice or saying nice things. If they run a subpar business that punishes freedom of expression, we can call that out and say it sucks.
- akerl_ 3y agoYou're, of course, welcome to not like Instagram, and to not do business with them, and to do business with other people, and to suggest that other people shouldn't use Instagram. But it's absolute baloney to claim that they punish freedom of expression because the venn diagram of "content they're willing to host on their infrastructure" and "content you want to publish" aren't perfectly aligned. Calling my burger shop bad because it doesn't serve salads is similarly baloney.
- wyre 3y agoUX decisions are not humanitarian crises. Full stop.
- akerl_ 3y agoI never suggested you couldn’t dislike a platform. I dislike eggplant, but I’m not going around saying eggplant is part of a war on broccoli consumption.
- vorpalhex 3y agoLet's say if _every_ restaurant in town, when you tried to order broccoli, gave you eggplant instead. You say "hey, I don't want eggplant, I don't like eggplant" and the restaurants response is to say "but eggplant is really good and only bad people don't like eggplant. You aren't anti-eggplant are you?" It's not an issue when it's one restaurant - that's just weird - but when it starts being 90%... 95%.. when they restaurants all get together and form an anti-broccoli commission, and start colluding to make selling broccoli illegal.. When the restaurants go to the Federal Government and say they need laws making broccoli illegal?
- akerl_ 3y agoRestaurants are free to petition the government, in the same way that you're free to petition the government. And insofar as there has been lobbying to make some kinds of expression illegal, I've generally been opposed to it. But as far as I can tell, every modern example of a group lobbying the government to make kinds of expression illegal have not come from social media platforms, they've come from Republican lobbying groups trying to get books banned or drag shows banned.
- vorpalhex 3y agoWell, we're commenting on an article where the Whitehouse, the President of the United States, has been told to stop abusing their authority to censor speech. I would point out those book bans are not banned from reading or publication.. they are banned from school libraries because they have graphic descriptions of sex. If you feel it's important for your kid to be exposed to a storybook primer on gay oral sex... I suppose you should write your congressperson. And in banning drag shows, the prohibition is on drag shows with underage attendees, usually without parental permission. Again, if you feel your kid needs to see someone in drag hip thrust in yoga pants on a stage without your consent.. you're welcome to lobby for that as you see fit. I will spend my time fighting and continuing to fight for the freedom of expression.
- alistairSH 3y agoFreedom of speech isn't just about what the government does. As far as the first amendment is concerned, government limitation of free speech, political speech in particular, is what matters.