Substack says it will not remove or demonetize Nazi content

breakfastmtn@lemmy.ca to Technology@lemmy.world – 850 points – Substack says it will not remove or demonetize Nazi content
theverge.com

More than 200 Substack authors asked the platform to explain why it’s “platforming and monetizing Nazis,” and now they have an answer straight from co-founder Hamish McKenzie:

I just want to make it clear that we don’t like Nazis either—we wish no-one held those views. But some people do hold those and other extreme views. Given that, we don’t think that censorship (including through demonetizing publications) makes the problem go away—in fact, it makes it worse.

While McKenzie offers no evidence to back these ideas, this tracks with the company’s previous stance on taking a hands-off approach to moderation. In April, Substack CEO Chris Best appeared on the Decoder podcast and refused to answer moderation questions. “We’re not going to get into specific ‘would you or won’t you’ content moderation questions” over the issue of overt racism being published on the platform, Best said. McKenzie followed up later with a similar statement to the one today, saying “we don’t like or condone bigotry in any form.”

418

You are viewing a single comment
View all comments

Okay fine, I'm never clicking on a substack link again.

And after say a grace period of about 6 months to move elsewhere, I'm going to assume anyone associating with the service is at best a nazi sympathiser

Go ahead, be a Nazi bar, I'm sure their money is worth it

This is such a complicated feeling... On one hand, I agree. But on the other, we can't specifically pinpoint what censorship is valid and what isn't.

Edit: Obviously, I'm not considering Nazis in this thought experiment.

Edit 2: OH MY GOD PEOPLE! OF FUCKING COURSE WE SHOULD KEEP NAZIS OUT FFS! 😑

But on the other, we can’t specifically pinpoint what censorship is valid and what isn’t.

Yes we can. Kicking Nazis off their platform is valid censorship. Nazis lost the right to have a seat at the table in 1945.

It's indeed very difficult if not impossible to exactly and specifically pinpoint where the line is, it is however extremely easy to see when ideologies and behavior steps across it.

If you're still hand wringing over whether or not Nazis are scum of the Earth that deserve nothing more than pure vitriol and ostracisation, you might be a Nazi.

But on the other, we can’t specifically pinpoint what censorship is valid and what isn’t.

I've seen this come up a few times. My response has been "luckily our platforms aren't run by an inscrutable god-machine nor an evil genie".

For non government cases like this, we don't need to solve the general case. We can just say "no Nazis allowed", and "no hating on queer folks " and so on as needed. Web forums have had rules for more than 30 years and it hasn't been a crisis.

It is only censorship when it is the government, else it is normal people not wanting to deal with Nazis.

If you really want your white supremacists views out there just roll your own setup

It is only censorship when it is the government, else it is normal people not wanting to deal with Nazis.

Makes sense.

If you really want your white supremacists views out there just roll your own setup

sighs I'm not even gonna try to address it now.