Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Tony Stubblebine (coachtony@me.dm)'s status on Saturday, 21-Jan-2023 03:23:26 JST Tony Stubblebine

   Consider "free speech" as a loud rallying cry that emerges from the creator side of content marketplaces.

   What then is the countering rallying cry from the consumer side of content marketplaces? As a reader, what is it that we actually want?

   • Embed this notice
     Marlon Weems (geektrader@c.im)'s status on Saturday, 21-Jan-2023 03:23:23 JST Marlon Weems

     in reply to

     @coachtony Nine times out of ten, the people I see carrying on about “free speech” are really advocating for freedom from consequences.

     My view is that “free speech” equals the right to say/write whatever they want. You want to engage in hate speech? Fine, have at it. Want to spread disinformation? Be my guest.

     Just know that “free speech” isn’t a shield to absolve you from what happens next.

   • Embed this notice
     Tony Stubblebine (coachtony@me.dm)'s status on Saturday, 21-Jan-2023 03:23:24 JST Tony Stubblebine

     in reply to

     So I still see the value in free speech. It's about liberty. It's participation--wrong speech (2+2=5) can lead to discussion and increased understanding. It's about distrust in institutions.

     But here we are in practice. With amplification, wrong speech can amplify wrong understanding.

     That doesn't feel right. And so where I ended up settling is that free speech is primarily a tactic.

     What we really want is better lives.

     Dr. Matt Lee ?:verified: repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Tony Stubblebine (coachtony@me.dm)'s status on Saturday, 21-Jan-2023 03:23:25 JST Tony Stubblebine

     in reply to

     Meanwhile, one of my formational political experiences was hearing my dad, who worked in the music industry, rant against parental advisory labels for music.

     As I internalized it, this was a slippery slope to outright censorship and massive government overreach by democrats (Tipper Gore).

     Everyone should have a voice, even if they are wrong. Otherwise we get tyranny.

   • Embed this notice
     Tony Stubblebine (coachtony@me.dm)'s status on Saturday, 21-Jan-2023 03:23:26 JST Tony Stubblebine

     in reply to

     I got my start in publishing at a respected company that was respected specifically for being the opposite of free speech.

     The entire brand was based on quality, accuracy and relevance.

     The way we did that was by building a massive amount of editorial machinery. High standard for who could speak, i.e. authors. Heavy handed editing. Community contributed corrections.

     Nobody ever cried censorship.