fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #3345 ]

⌈ Secret Post #3345 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

__________________________________________________

11.

__________________________________________________

12.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 044 secrets from Secret Submission Post #478.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 1 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I think it will be selectively employed.

And if you don't think it will (and, worse, if you think it should be), then you are willfully blind.

It already has been, or something like it, shadow banning conservative bloggers or those who are not banner waving democrats. No matter where you are on the political spectrum you should find censorship of free speech appalling.

In before "this isn't real censorship!" and "Twitter doesn't owe you a platform!"

Technically correct. But I will also note that people who say this are generally the first people to hystericaly holler OMG BOOK BANNING when a parent raises concerns about a novel in a classroom, and that we have Banned Books Week in a country that does not actually ban any books. Ever.

So, blah blah blah. The point remains. If y'all want an echo chamber, I guess you're welcome to it.

NAYRT

I don't disagree that presuming no one is harassing or harming anyone that they should be allowed to say what they want. However your points there are ridiculous.

First, Twitter is a private company. They don't owe anyone a platform. I think they should provide the platform for everyone and that it would be ridiculous to ban people for opinions rather than banning them for harming others, but that is their site, so their choice. Schools, on the other hand, are not private companies. (Well, unless we are talking private or Catholic schools.) Thus, things they do are actual censorship. (I want to reiterate that I don't agree with what Twitter is doing and think it is actually rather idiotic, but you are setting up a false dichotomy.)

And sure, the US hasn't officially banned books, but as a librarian, I can tell you that many, many, many schools have. I'm not talking about being sensible about age ranges. Such that a book that is more mature is put in the middle school library rather than the elementary school library. Or something along those lines. I'm talking about actual banning of books and not letting them in the library system at all. I'm not saying that every book ever should be available to all students at all times. That would be impractical. But Harry Potter? To Kill a Mockingbird? So many other popular and/or classic/important stories that are challenged and banned and shouldn't be? It is definitely a thing.

I'm not arguing that Twitter (or anyplace else) owes me a platform. But there is the spirit and the letter of the thing, and if Twitter is going to continue to ban people based on viewpoint, they should straight-up say "Conservatives not welcome here," and be done. That way everyone knows where they stand.

As for school libraries not carrying certain books, well, like you say, carrying everything is impractical. This is why we have city and county library systems. Also, a "challenge" is a far far cry from an out-and-out ban. I am fairly (though not wholly) certain that "To Kill a Mockingbird" is in every single age-appropriate public school library in the country.

I can't help but find it striking how often banning harassment is framed as banning conservatism. I've seen plenty of liberals harass people, and some sites even ban them for it, but that's never framed as a ban on liberalism.

Well, maybe that's because that's how it's been employed lately, and especially in this particular case.

I also find it rather ironic that conservatives are seen as being the ban-happy ones, while it's most often liberals screaming BURN THE WITCH.

[ SECRET POST #3345 ]

Re: Twitter trust and safety council

Re: Twitter trust and safety council

AYRT

Re: AYRT

Re: AYRT

Re: AYRT

Re: AYRT