Support NeoGAF

[samporter]

If we take the words "free speech" literally, someone may interpret the "free" part to mean "cost no money" or that it does not have a monetary value. Examples of "free", assuming this definition, would be "free healthcare", "free tuition", "free housing".

Almost everyone can agree that "free healthcare" may not have the same quality as premium private health insurance, or "free tuition" may not be the best education money can buy. "Free speech" then, is something people with resource would not really want or have to deal with. A rambling political speech by a Walmart cashier is surely not of any worth to most people, but a speech from former presidents can cost thousands of dollars.

If we were to assume that the cost of something is determined by its given value, then "free speech" can literally imply having very little value or cheap.

Do you think these social media companies, Facebook/Twitter, are treating "free speech" according to their worth. That is to say, they rank free speech by different criterias, such as level of education, income, gender, syntax and semantic? Could they perhaps rate free speech from college dropout "racist" as not having the same worth as free speech by college educated liberals? Could this be what this whole hate speech problem is able? Ranking people's speech according to their perceived value?

P.S. this topic is not attacking free speech, or the romanticize notion of free speech. It's simply about "free speech" as a cost proposition.

 

[DKehoe]

Free means unimpeded. Not the price or value.

 

[Birdo]

Do you think these social media companies, Facebook/Twitter, are treating "free speech" according to their worth.

The only reason social media companies police speech, is because advertisers don't want to be associated with controversy.

It all boils down to money.

 

[LoV]

Free speech is gone. Majority social media sites are far left and supress anything conservative.

 

[Coolwhhip]

Words are just words, you should be able to say all of them. Even the scary words like the N word. If you use words like that you aren't making friends obviously, but you should be able to.

But cancel culture is a great way for people to take down anyone they envy, so freedom of speech is in trouble.

 

[triplestation]

give respect to get respect

 

[Woo-Fu]

Free speech only means freedom from government persecution for what you say. It doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with social-media platforms run by corporations.

What you're talking about is social norms, not free speech. The social media platforms model their TOS around social norms and any relevant legislation(freedom of speech not being relevant in this case).

The current issue is that the social norm being pushed by the young, college-educated liberals who run these platforms is not widely accepted by the rest of America.

If you do want to worry about freedom of speech your first stop should be examining hate speech legislation.

 

[Phunkydiabetic]

Free speech is gone. Majority social media sites are far left and supress anything conservative.

You'd have to be utterly daft or willingly ignorant to believe that the "far left" is behind the loss of free speech (as if it was ever fully there to begin with). It is blindingly obvious that the policing of free speech occurs with any website because revenue would be affected.

 

[and 3 others]

Some thing my father always told me: "Just because it's free, doesn't mean there isn't a cost".

 

[and 3 others]

You'd have to be utterly daft or willingly ignorant to believe that the "far left" is behind the loss of free speech (as if it was ever fully there to begin with). It is blindingly obvious that the policing of free speech occurs with any website because revenue would be affected.

Sorry for double post, but why would their revenue be affected?

 

[LoV]

You'd have to be utterly daft or willingly ignorant to believe that the "far left" is behind the loss of free speech (as if it was ever fully there to begin with). It is blindingly obvious that the policing of free speech occurs with any website because revenue would be affected.

Why would ad companies care unless it hurts their bottom line for "wrong think" ? The far left has control of what's good and bad and cancel culture affects revenue.

 

[Phunkydiabetic]

Sorry for double post, but why would their revenue be affected?

Why would ad companies care unless it hurts their bottom line for "wrong think" ? The far left has control of what's good and bad and cancel culture affects revenue.

Ad agencies (which most of these sites derive the majority of their income from) are notoriously easy to spook, especially in times like these. The companies putting out these ads want nothing to do with anything that'll "tarnish" their brand. Whether it comes from the left or the right it doesn't matter, profits do.

 

[Cunth]

The only reason social media companies police speech, is because advertisers don't want to be associated with controversy.

It all boils down to money.

That's not the only reason. At least not in the case of Twitter.

 

[and 3 others]

Ad agencies (which most of these sites derive the majority of their income from) are notoriously easy to spook, especially in times like these. The companies putting out these ads want nothing to do with anything that'll "tarnish" their brand. Whether it comes from the left or the right it doesn't matter, profits do.

When was the last time 'the right' went after anything in advertising? 15 years?

 

[poppabk]

When was the last time 'the right' went after anything in advertising? 15 years?

We have posts on here almost everyday with people complaining about 'woke' ads. Such and such ad had gay people in it etc. The difference is that the left are much more active in the key advertiser demographics.
Currently the post right after this one is complaining about a google 'doodle'.

 

[and 3 others]

We have posts on here almost everyday with people complaining about 'woke' ads. Such and such ad had gay people in it etc. The difference is that the left are much more active in the key advertiser demographics.
Currently the post right after this one is complaining about a google 'doodle'.

Most people here complaining about those things are left/center left.

 

[HellforLeather]

This topic is bizarre


This is what is meant by free speech

Free means unimpeded. Not the price or value.

P.S. this topic is not attacking free speech

You say this but....

Could they perhaps rate free speech from college dropout "racist" as not having the same worth as free speech by college educated liberals? Could this be what this whole hate speech problem is able? Ranking people's speech according to their perceived value?

This proposition is a direct attack on free speech.

To paraphrase Sam Harris, there are only two means by which we can work through issues on a societal level: speech and violence. When we fail to communicate and cannot agree on the basic facts of the world and our situation, violence is all that is left. This is why its so important to have free speech and to encourage real dialogue.

 

[sonomamashine]

If we take the words "free speech" literally, someone may interpret the "free" part to mean "cost no money" or that it does not have a monetary value. Examples of "free", assuming this definition, would be "free healthcare", "free tuition", "free housing".

I stoped reading right there, who the hell thinks free speech means monetary value.

 

[belmarduk]

Freedom isn't free.. No, there's a hefty fuckin' fee.. and if you don't thow in your buck oh five who will?

 

[Phunkydiabetic]

We have posts on here almost everyday with people complaining about 'woke' ads. Such and such ad had gay people in it etc. The difference is that the left are much more active in the key advertiser demographics.
Currently the post right after this one is complaining about a google 'doodle'.

I find it amazing that no matter the situation Murricans will manage to spin it into a left vs right thing. You people are so brainwashed it isn't funny. It is kind of depressing really.