Free speech. Strangely that has somehow inverted in recent years. It wasn't long ago that censorship was the domain of the right who were in a panic about what's acceptable speech and actively trying to police it.
"master branch" and "grandfathered code" and "sanity check" are just a few of the terms suddenly deemed unacceptable.
Joe Rogan says dangerous things and must be silenced. Who is a Bernie supporter smeared as alt-right for saying unapproved things.
All kinds of campus panics about "unsafe" words and ideas. One example is a professor that said a word that sounds like another word during a lecture. It made some students uncomfortable and the professor was put on immediate leave.
People being cancelled for jokes they made a decade ago.
One specific example might be recent panics over "misinformation" (e.g. covid misinformation), what I would call the idea that incorrect, contrarian, or offensive speech online isn't just bad, but fundamentally dangerous. Even if you believe this is true, there is absolutely a powerful moral panic movement that exaggerates the terribleness of misinformation, and generally places itself in opposition to free speech in its solutions that call for more and broader censorship of online platforms.
Of course this perspective relies on a few base assumptions, such as: 1) free speech exists as an ideal aside from legal protections, 2) corporate censorship is a threat to this ideal, and 3) misinformation isn't as bad as the alarmists claim it is. If you don't agree with those points, it might not appear as a moral panic to you, which may explain some of the confusion.
spacemanmatt|4 years ago
atlantas|4 years ago
Joe Rogan says dangerous things and must be silenced. Who is a Bernie supporter smeared as alt-right for saying unapproved things.
All kinds of campus panics about "unsafe" words and ideas. One example is a professor that said a word that sounds like another word during a lecture. It made some students uncomfortable and the professor was put on immediate leave.
People being cancelled for jokes they made a decade ago.
It just goes on and on.
harpersealtako|4 years ago
Of course this perspective relies on a few base assumptions, such as: 1) free speech exists as an ideal aside from legal protections, 2) corporate censorship is a threat to this ideal, and 3) misinformation isn't as bad as the alarmists claim it is. If you don't agree with those points, it might not appear as a moral panic to you, which may explain some of the confusion.