←back to thread

1525 points garyclarke27 | 2 comments | | HN request time: 1.237s | source
Show context
kleiba ◴[] No.23219907[source]
I've never lived in China but this immediately sounds like my (naive) idea of what it must be like: you're only allowed to consume what the government has approved.

I think this is setting a dangerous precedence.

replies(3): >>23219936 #>>23220090 #>>23220341 #
weiming ◴[] No.23219936[source]
Except in this case it's not the government, but private corporations taking some kind of political stance.

Google in particular has been very "active," not to forget also: https://www.businessinsider.com/youtube-will-ban-anything-ag... ("video that 'goes against' WHO guidance on the pandemic will be blocked")

replies(3): >>23220012 #>>23220511 #>>23223162 #
1. tumetab1 ◴[] No.23220511[source]
> private corporations taking some kind of political stance.

It's not a political stance, it's a moderation action.

Google, Facebook, etc. are just bad moderators of their platforms.

Selective enforcement of moderations policies is bad moderation. Implementing automated moderation without proper quality control is bad moderation. Implementing automated moderation without proper appeal processes is bad moderation.

The moderation policy is insane, but I think how moderation is done is even more insane.

replies(1): >>23221002 #
2. freshhawk ◴[] No.23221002[source]
Try posting something either of those companies care about (I don't mean copyrighted stuff that can be automated) and see how fast it gets taken down.

Given that there is selective attention given to different political subjects it is by definition a political stance.