4 ms·

I'm curious what trends you see towards censorship? Elon presumably being an exemplar for current trends: Twitter is unarguably far less censored than it was b

I'm curious what trends you see towards censorship? Elon presumably being an exemplar for current trends: Twitter is unarguably far less censored than it was before (though censorship is still present). And Meta took note and also turned down its censorship significantly in response. The Epstein files, while far less than hoped for by many, are another example of a trend towards sharing far more sensitive info than has been typical by past administrations. There are many good examples you could point to of increased authoritarianism, but censorship in particular seems to be on the backswing, if anything. Edit: oof, it's extremely concerning that the comment below was flagged

geraneum 14d ago
It’s too soon for such a conclusion IMO. The pervasive Iran-like censorship I was talking about will rear its ugly head when those authoritarian regimes are established. It’s a tool and I can assure you it will be used extensively. This is nothing new really. P.S. the Epstein files were just a cruel joke! I wouldn’t list it there.
- howunfortunate 14d ago
  It doesn't add up for me. If the goal is simply authoritarian control, why would they employ less censorship than their predecessors? Surely they could get away with at the very least the same amount?
  - geraneum 14d ago
    > simply authoritarian control There’s nothing simple about authoritarian control. Who says we have less censorship? Sure people can tweet all kind of stuff without getting banned. Fine, but at the same time US president is removing news networks he doesn’t like from press briefings. That’s just one example. To say the censorship is in decline is baffling.
  - trombuance 13d ago
    [dead]
ACCount39 14d ago
Multiple jurisdictions have tried to play the stupid games of "we'll make a dumb fuck law that creates problems for you, the website operator, and if you don't conform, we'll sinkhole you at ISP level". Platforms like Xitter and Telegram being the common early targets. The "age verification" push is a big move in that direction in Western countries. "Think of the children" is an evergreen excuse for authoritarian measures.
deleted 14d ago
[deleted]
qerghnui 14d ago
>Twitter is unarguably far less censored than it was before (though censorship is still present). And Meta took note and also turned down its censorship significantly in response. A publisher making editorial decisions is not censorship. You have no right to demand Twitter publish your speech. If you don't like their editorial policies, you are free to go elsewhere. You are not prevented from speaking or even prevented from reaching an audience. None of these platforms is a monopoly. For my money, I would prefer to hang out somewhere where people don't openly celebrate the murder of my family. Would you deny me that right? If so, you are not on the side of freedom. I don't object to the existence of forums like /pol/ or today's Twitter; if you object to the existence of moderated forums like Twitter in its prime then you are the one restricting speech. Today, we see flagrant examples of the literal government literally prohibiting people from speaking their minds. Literal masked thugs with literal guns are literally grabbing people off the streets. This is censorship like the Soviets did it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zu3q1eYyR1A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zu3q1eYyR1A https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/19/us/politics/trump-cnn-msnow-press-ban.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/19/us/politics/trump-cnn-msn... https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fcc-disney-abc-early-license-renewal-jimmy-kimmel-dei/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fcc-disney-abc-early-license-re... https://www.aclum.org/cases/ozturk-v-trump/ https://www.aclum.org/cases/ozturk-v-trump/ https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2026/07/31/professor-fired-teaching-political-story-sues-college https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2026/07/31/p... https://www.propublica.org/article/caught-in-crackdown-ice-cbp-doj-trump-arrests-convictions https://www.propublica.org/article/caught-in-crackdown-ice-c... Twitter has certainly relaxed its policies on racism and violence in recent years, and perhaps you think that's a good thing. But point out that they're paying Nazis to post about their hatred of Jews (an undisputed fact even if you object to the framing) and they'll file SLAPP suits to try to bankrupt you. They very much go in for censorship (the real kind, backed up by guys with guns) when it benefits them. https://www.fire.org/news/fire-statement-x-corps-lawsuit-and-texass-investigation-media-matters-america-are-deeply https://www.fire.org/news/fire-statement-x-corps-lawsuit-and...
- howunfortunate 14d ago
  > A publisher making editorial decisions is not censorship. You have no right to compel other people to publish your speech. If you don't like Twitter's editorial policies, you are free to go elsewhere When a social media deletes users posts because they cross a political line, it may not be government censorship, but it's very obviously still censorship. It's very hard to take opinions like yours seriously because I know exactly how you'd react if all your HN posts were deleted because you're calling people "Nazis"
bl00per 14d ago
[dead]
- deleted 13d ago
  [deleted]
- cherrylimesoda 13d ago
  [dead]

geraneum 14d ago

It’s too soon for such a conclusion IMO. The pervasive Iran-like censorship I was talking about will rear its ugly head when those authoritarian regimes are established. It’s a tool and I can assure you it will be used extensively. This is nothing new really. P.S. the Epstein files were just a cruel joke! I wouldn’t list it there.

howunfortunate 14d ago
It doesn't add up for me. If the goal is simply authoritarian control, why would they employ less censorship than their predecessors? Surely they could get away with at the very least the same amount?
- geraneum 14d ago
  > simply authoritarian control There’s nothing simple about authoritarian control. Who says we have less censorship? Sure people can tweet all kind of stuff without getting banned. Fine, but at the same time US president is removing news networks he doesn’t like from press briefings. That’s just one example. To say the censorship is in decline is baffling.
- trombuance 13d ago
  [dead]

ACCount39 14d ago

Multiple jurisdictions have tried to play the stupid games of "we'll make a dumb fuck law that creates problems for you, the website operator, and if you don't conform, we'll sinkhole you at ISP level". Platforms like Xitter and Telegram being the common early targets. The "age verification" push is a big move in that direction in Western countries. "Think of the children" is an evergreen excuse for authoritarian measures.

deleted 14d ago

[deleted]

qerghnui 14d ago

>Twitter is unarguably far less censored than it was before (though censorship is still present). And Meta took note and also turned down its censorship significantly in response. A publisher making editorial decisions is not censorship. You have no right to demand Twitter publish your speech. If you don't like their editorial policies, you are free to go elsewhere. You are not prevented from speaking or even prevented from reaching an audience. None of these platforms is a monopoly. For my money, I would prefer to hang out somewhere where people don't openly celebrate the murder of my family. Would you deny me that right? If so, you are not on the side of freedom. I don't object to the existence of forums like /pol/ or today's Twitter; if you object to the existence of moderated forums like Twitter in its prime then you are the one restricting speech. Today, we see flagrant examples of the literal government literally prohibiting people from speaking their minds. Literal masked thugs with literal guns are literally grabbing people off the streets. This is censorship like the Soviets did it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zu3q1eYyR1A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zu3q1eYyR1A https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/19/us/politics/trump-cnn-msnow-press-ban.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/09/19/us/politics/trump-cnn-msn... https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fcc-disney-abc-early-license-renewal-jimmy-kimmel-dei/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/fcc-disney-abc-early-license-re... https://www.aclum.org/cases/ozturk-v-trump/ https://www.aclum.org/cases/ozturk-v-trump/ https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2026/07/31/professor-fired-teaching-political-story-sues-college https://www.insidehighered.com/news/quick-takes/2026/07/31/p... https://www.propublica.org/article/caught-in-crackdown-ice-cbp-doj-trump-arrests-convictions https://www.propublica.org/article/caught-in-crackdown-ice-c... Twitter has certainly relaxed its policies on racism and violence in recent years, and perhaps you think that's a good thing. But point out that they're paying Nazis to post about their hatred of Jews (an undisputed fact even if you object to the framing) and they'll file SLAPP suits to try to bankrupt you. They very much go in for censorship (the real kind, backed up by guys with guns) when it benefits them. https://www.fire.org/news/fire-statement-x-corps-lawsuit-and-texass-investigation-media-matters-america-are-deeply https://www.fire.org/news/fire-statement-x-corps-lawsuit-and...

howunfortunate 14d ago
> A publisher making editorial decisions is not censorship. You have no right to compel other people to publish your speech. If you don't like Twitter's editorial policies, you are free to go elsewhere When a social media deletes users posts because they cross a political line, it may not be government censorship, but it's very obviously still censorship. It's very hard to take opinions like yours seriously because I know exactly how you'd react if all your HN posts were deleted because you're calling people "Nazis"

bl00per 14d ago

[dead]

deleted 13d ago
[deleted]
cherrylimesoda 13d ago
[dead]