Read on Twitter
So, this year I’ve seen a lot of people talk of “opting out” of social media because it’s become too toxic.
And fair to some degree.
But it’s worth noting that if you feel you can opt out, it’s probably because your voice is heard elsewhere.
And fair to some degree.
But it’s worth noting that if you feel you can opt out, it’s probably because your voice is heard elsewhere.
If you’re white, educated, straight, well off - you can still read books/newspapers, watch TV, consume news and 90% is still pandering to you and your worldview or from your perspective.
For many marginalised groups who’ve never really had a look in on these more traditional platforms (or tokenistic at best) they’ve been able to have a voice and be heard for the first time in generations or in their lives.
I’m a white male in a wealthy country, so I have a lot of privilege, but as a queer person - social media has been one of the only places I can fully engage with other queer people and perspectives.
Honestly, without it I’d probably still be in the closet and deeply unhappy.
Honestly, without it I’d probably still be in the closet and deeply unhappy.
Without access to my queer communities and people over the last 2 decades digitally, there’s a chance I mightn’t be here today. And that’s the truth.
And those of you worried about the overreach of big tech - it’s already been happening for a long time.
Queer people have been getting banned and regulated on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Tumblr for the entire existence of these platforms.
Queer people have been getting banned and regulated on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Tumblr for the entire existence of these platforms.
What’s different today, is for the first time powerful people and their mobs are being regulated.
And sadly, the same tools that have given marginalised communities places to speak and connect have also given dangerous, powerful people places to speak and connect.
And sadly, the same tools that have given marginalised communities places to speak and connect have also given dangerous, powerful people places to speak and connect.
What’s my point?
Tech regulating speech isn’t new.
For marginalised communities we’ve always been regulated. Big tech gave us new platforms with some benefits for organising and connecting, but they’ve regulated us the whole way.
Tech regulating speech isn’t new.
For marginalised communities we’ve always been regulated. Big tech gave us new platforms with some benefits for organising and connecting, but they’ve regulated us the whole way.
Dominant groups?
They’ve had their “free speech” all along. Barely regulated at all. On traditional mediums and digital mediums.
They’re shocked because it’s happening for the first time, but for marginalised communities it’s what we’re used to.
They’ve had their “free speech” all along. Barely regulated at all. On traditional mediums and digital mediums.
They’re shocked because it’s happening for the first time, but for marginalised communities it’s what we’re used to.
“The marketplace of ideas” and “free speech” is and always was about society’s dominant groups.
We never had an equal platform in the marketplace of ideas. We never had “free speech”. No marginalised group has ever had “free speech”.
We never had an equal platform in the marketplace of ideas. We never had “free speech”. No marginalised group has ever had “free speech”.
Regulation is hard.
Marginalised groups have been hurt by regulation.
It’s imperfect.
It has its own risks.
But libertarianism just protects the already dominant and powerful.
There must be a middle ground.
Marginalised groups have been hurt by regulation.
It’s imperfect.
It has its own risks.
But libertarianism just protects the already dominant and powerful.
There must be a middle ground.
