Is Internet Free Speech Dead?

Lancecastor

Lit's Most Beloved Poster
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
54,670
As the Internet evolves towards a being a primarily commercial venue, the Terms of Service (TOS) of free speech pioneers such as Twitter (and Lit) have moved away from pure Free Speech to something...less.

Is Internet Free Speech dead?


Twitter, one of the poster children of the freewheeling social media era that once called itself “the free speech wing of the free speech party” turns 10 years old this coming March, offering an opportunity to look back on how it has navigated the ever-changing fluidity of online speech.

Motherboard published a fascinating look back at how Twitter’s rules have evolved over the past decade and how its own experiences as flag bearer of the social media revolution have influenced and changed the accepted wisdom of the juxtaposition of freedom of speech and commercial reality.

From its founding principles that guided the site through the end of last year that enshrined “because of these principles, we do not actively monitor and will not censor user content except in limited circumstances” to its new rules, published last month that clarify “there are some limitations on the type of content and behavior that we allow,” Twitter has evolved along with the web itself.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevle...ing-away-from-freedom-of-speech/#4acdd30d6770
 
Too tired to pick up what they mean.
But I'd be interested to know where their emphasis lies, which ones are more or less ok from their pov :
- personal attacks and cyberbullying
- or scornful generalizations and bigotted remarks

Because this seems to be one of the things on which some GBers seem to disagree.
 
There have only been some tiny Free Speech Zones on the Internet, like beyond the parking lot at a GOP convention.

There is no size limit, so if you want to create your own zone, go for it.
 
I thought you'd have to be a teenager to think the Internet begins and ends with social media.
 
You are far less likely to have your right to Free Speech limited by using the telephone than the internet.
 
Please don't read the article under any circumstances, retards.




It is a fascinating commentary on society that just a few years past its 20th anniversary, the web is facing such growing pains and is evolving from its roots as the anti-censorship platform of free speech and towards the very corporate-controlled moderated medium beholden to commercial and governmental interests that it rebelled against.
 
Please don't read the article under any circumstances, retards.

The article is wrong.

The platform of free speech is still there.

You can sell Heroine, Meth, Crack, kids, live feed snuff videos...... ANYTHING YOU WANT on the internet....you can say ANYTHING you want on the internet.


IF....you know how to use the internet.


For the masses that don't know how to use the internet they have been sold corporate interfaces subject to corporate (and thus government) fuckery.

Ignorance and complacency are not censorship and oppression. If you don't like how Facebook censors their shit quit using the mother fucker. Build your own server do your own thing....nothing stopping you or anyone else from starting your own free speech zone social media site.
 
I withdraw my retardation allegation.

Yes, you are right...if you know how to "use" the Internet.

Which now means "in private".


The article is wrong.

The platform of free speech is still there.

You can sell Heroine, Meth, Crack, kids, live feed snuff videos...... ANYTHING YOU WANT on the internet....you can say ANYTHING you want on the internet.


IF....you know how to use the internet.


For the masses that don't know how to use the internet they have been sold corporate interfaces subject to corporate (and thus government) fuckery.

Ignorance and complacency are not censorship and oppression. If you don't like how Facebook censors their shit quit using the mother fucker. Build your own server do your own thing....nothing stopping you or anyone else from starting your own free speech zone social media site.
 
I only have IP phone. So I'm using the telephone... on the internet.

Does your provider keep transcripts of your voip calls?

(No)

Voice is more secure than text.

Fax is more secure than voice or ip text, due primarily to obsolesence.

Maybe the GB should migrate to Shortwave.
 
I would hope there's some restrictions!
Not inciting terrorism, for example.
The problem lies in the current rules... nobody can quite agree on what they should be and as a result almost every site has differing regulations as to what is acceptable.
Perhaps it should be simplified to one rule - no conduct of any kind that results in pbysical or emotional harm to another person or people.
That would cover bullying, selling dangerous drugs, etc.
Tbh, I don't know if rules in a virtual environment will ever work. Look at this place as a prime example.
 
I withdraw my retardation allegation.

Yes, you are right...if you know how to "use" the Internet.

Which now means "in private".

Just because it's not spoon fed to the masses on Twitter/Facebook doesn't make it private.
 
As a rule the commercial class are the middle-class and the middle-class hate controversy more than violent death. Hitler recruited all of his death camp guards from the middle class shop-keeps, because theyre intolerant of people who create controversy.
 
As a rule the commercial class are the middle-class and the middle-class hate controversy more than violent death. Hitler recruited all of his death camp guards from the middle class shop-keeps, because theyre intolerant of people who create controversy.

Plus, the word Free has been sold to the masses as the biggest lie ever.

Our data has value. It's not free and now we aren't either.
 
Free speech is okay as long as its politically correct, meaning....its not free speech anymore, its "you're free to say what the PC crowd says its okay to say"
 
Free speech is okay as long as its politically correct, meaning....its not free speech anymore, its "you're free to say what the PC crowd says its okay to say"

Free speech isn't freedom from ridicule and or different opinions.
 
So-called social media was invented to curtail the free speech of Internet 1.0. The message boards, chat rooms, and user groups of the early years of the internet and their anonymity were deemed unacceptable to the World Government so social media was created with the goal of weakening true free speech. However people will find ways to express themselves anyway.
 
I would hope there's some restrictions!
Not inciting terrorism, for example.
The problem lies in the current rules... nobody can quite agree on what they should be and as a result almost every site has differing regulations as to what is acceptable.
Perhaps it should be simplified to one rule - no conduct of any kind that results in pbysical or emotional harm to another person or people.
That would cover bullying, selling dangerous drugs, etc.
Tbh, I don't know if rules in a virtual environment will ever work. Look at this place as a prime example.

The australian government apparentally let you on the internet, but can tap anything you do... and sometimes they do it just in case.
 
Comments sections on web sites are also being sharply curtailed or shut down.
 
Yes, that's become the new default definition of free speech online.

Whoever is writing the cheque defines how much you're able to say.
 
Back
Top