This is going to be an important thread. We need to talk about YouTube, and private media operations in generalThis thread was prompted by YouTube’s shadow ban of my new video, but that’s really just a minor inconvenience. The whole story involves YouTube, the DHS, and the CIA— JT Chapman (@_SecondThought) November 28, 2020
But we don't in a full sense. It is not illegal to say those things (with the arguable exception of some BDS laws), and you can't go to prison for it. That's very different from having a youtube video taken down.
This is more a case of private corporations controlling the large majority of online speech, which is itself an important related issue. But it's not the same as outright law.
You're right, it would be worse if it were actually illegal, and laws against hate speech could easily be designed to include this. That's reasonable to worry about. Or they could be designed to include only real hate speech, and not dissent generally, which would be a good outcome. Free speech isn't an absolute good, it's good when we have it and it's good when fascists (and etc) don't have it.
Basically, good laws would be good, bad laws would be bad, but right now this is all hypothetical so we can't say anything specific enough about it to mean anything. Until that changes, imo it's something to keep an eye on but not fixate on, and instead work on more concrete issues that can change the balance of class forces, which is what would create the context for any legal changes anyway.
OTOH if you're really fired up for this issue then go for it, I personally don't think it's a priority right now, but I also think some diversity in strategy is good overall.
But we don't in a full sense. It is not illegal to say those things (with the arguable exception of some BDS laws), and you can't go to prison for it. That's very different from having a youtube video taken down.
This is more a case of private corporations controlling the large majority of online speech, which is itself an important related issue. But it's not the same as outright law.
not sure it matters terribly much whether the coercion is legal or economic
Obviously they are both forms of coercion. But why increase the total amount of repression?
You're right, it would be worse if it were actually illegal, and laws against hate speech could easily be designed to include this. That's reasonable to worry about. Or they could be designed to include only real hate speech, and not dissent generally, which would be a good outcome. Free speech isn't an absolute good, it's good when we have it and it's good when fascists (and etc) don't have it.
Basically, good laws would be good, bad laws would be bad, but right now this is all hypothetical so we can't say anything specific enough about it to mean anything. Until that changes, imo it's something to keep an eye on but not fixate on, and instead work on more concrete issues that can change the balance of class forces, which is what would create the context for any legal changes anyway.
OTOH if you're really fired up for this issue then go for it, I personally don't think it's a priority right now, but I also think some diversity in strategy is good overall.