Slashdot Mirror
Reddit Will 'Hide' Vile Content After Policy Change
AmiMoJo writes: It will be more difficult to find "abhorrent" content posted to community news site Reddit, the site has announced. It stopped short of banning the material outright and instead will require users to log-in to access it. The company reiterated its existing complete bans of illegal content, including child abuse images and so-called "revenge porn." Chief executive and co-founder Steve Huffman told users: "We've spent the last few days here discussing, and agree that an approach like this allows us as a company to repudiate content we don't want to associate with the business, but gives individuals freedom to consume it if they choose."
Reddit introducing three tier content tiers: approved / hidden / banned. They announced that they would hide some of the undesirable content, as the summary said, but they are outright banning other content - they gave the example of /r/rapingwomen as a subreddit which would be banned, not hidden.
/r/justiceporn though, the real differentiator is probably better characterized as: "subs which we don't like and which also have a violence theme."
The differentiator between a sub to be banned and a sub to be hidden is officially the promotion of violence. Given the unlikelihood they that would start banning subs like
You're actually correct... contrary to the hivemind. The US constitution protects the Freedom of Speech from government interference. It didn't create the idea, it protects it.
Likewise, in most societies, Freedom of Speech is a cultural law. It's assumed. "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" was from Evelyn Beatrice Hall in 1906. Going all the way back, Athens, had the Freedom of Speech in the 5th century B.C.. The Romans also had Freedom of Speech. It's also apart of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and binding on all UN member states.
Just because the USA government's constitution only protects the Freedom of Speech from itself, doesn't mean it's not fucking important, worth fighting for, or a real thing outside of the government interactions.
Moreover, Freedom of Speech does move into the private sector in certain situations. Such as the landmark Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins case of 1980. In California, per their additional state constitutional wording, you can exercise your right to free speech in private shopping centers as long as you are peaceful. Many states have similar wording but have not followed as they are worried about the implications. But the point remains, the idea that "Freedom of Speech" means nothing except with regard to the USA federal government is a stupid lie.
Article 19 states that "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
Mod points are handed out at random.
No, it's linked to karma
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
Easy enough.
Om, nomnomnom...