Support NeoGAF

[Slings and Arrows]

Why?

I can watch five black fellas ram-rod an 18 year old white lass.
I can watch some guy get cut in half with a chainsaw
I can order enough drugs to kill myself, or others

Yet i can't call someone a fag (even if using the words to describe a British Cigarette) just for the laugh.

This isn't a joke thread, nor is it aimed at Gaf (which is the most open forum that i'm aware of).

I want to know sensible, adult reasons, as why i can view some of the most fucked-up acts of humanity, 24/7, but the text i type are the words of Satan.

Edit: Just in case someone takes my views/replies the wrong way, i'll explain. I'm basically a shaved chimp, crossed with the views of an innocent child. I don't understand racism or homophobia, why people defend or attack ideologies and i am in awe at how people work. For reference, check my OP in the Virgin thread.

There is no offence intended, or sides taken. Just a social retard still amazed by the jingling, shiny keys of society.

 

[Kadayi]

In my experience, the US has a particular hypersensitivity around that particular word that is largely absent in most other countries. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Cunth]

Cause my feelings are worth more than your job.

Ps. You’re cancelled

 

[Slings and Arrows]

In my experience, the US has a particular hypersensitivity around that particular word that is largely absent in most other countries. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Well, i meant 'banned' words in general. I just use fag as it gives me/the site a free-pass when it comes to advertising censorship, as it can be argued that i generally mean a Cigarette(and i do nudge, nudge, wink, wink) and not an old word for a person of homosexual persuasion.

 

[Mistake]

In my experience, the US has a particular hypersensitivity around that particular word that is largely absent in most other countries. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I see more people freak out over cunt than fag.

To answer your question op, it’s because of hypersensitive “adults” that avoid harsh reality

 

[Nymphae]

You can't use fag anymore because it expresses wrongthink and PC culture is working towards eradicating that on every possible front. You are not allowed to not like gays and thus not allowed to use language which expresses this as a possible mode of thought.

That the culture cares more about this sort of thing than it does access to violent and gorey fantasy nightmares and hardest of the hardcore pornography should tell you something. About us and our rulers.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

I see more people freak out over cunt than fag.

To answer your question op, it’s because of hypersensitive “adults” that avoid harsh reality

But why?

What is the root cause of a mentality that sees nothing wrong with extreme pornography and literal snuff? (r/watchpeopledie was the most disgusting and sickening part of the internet i've ever seen).

Why is people being literally killed OK, but a word is defcon 1?

You can't use fag anymore because it expresses wrongthink and PC culture is working towards eradicating that on every possible front. You are not allowed to not like gays and thus not allowed to use language which expresses this as a possible mode of thought.

That the culture cares more about this sort of thing than it does access to violent and gorey fantasy nightmares and hardest of the hardcore pornography should tell you something. About us and our rulers.

But why?

Is censorship of word a historical thing? I know censorship of sexual acts has always been high on the list, unsure about acts of violence?

At what point did the internet go from wild-west to '1984'. Was it the removal of anonymity that did it?

 

[Kadayi]

I see more people freak out over cunt than fag.

YMMV dependent on where you are.

 

[Nymphae]

What is the root cause of a mentality that sees nothing wrong with extreme pornography and literal snuff? (r/watchpeopledie was the most disgusting and sickening part of the internet i've ever seen).

Why is people being literally killed OK, but a word is defcon 1?

They would probably argue seeing people die is natural, it's inherently somewhat fascinating to most people, not being able to look away from a trainwreck being a common phrase. We are curious about those things.

The word fag though is demonstrating that a worldview still exists that the PC culture wants to eliminate.

 

[lock2k]

Not being native, I was amused when I learned about the "fag break".

I was like... "oh, so you have a break to do gay shit in the middle of the day?" lol

 

[Nymphae]

But why?

Is censorship of word a historical thing? I know censorship of sexual acts has always been high on the list, unsure about acts of violence?

At what point did the internet go from wild-west to '1984'. Was it the removal of anonymity that did it?

You're asking why is woke culture taking over and it's a pretty big question, not sure I can answer that comprehensively.

But the fact is, woke culture cares more about "social justice" and righting historical wrongs than it does things more normal people might be concerned with like people's ability to access extremely violent and hyper sexual media. These things likely advance the woke agendas in certain ways, they used to be more frowned upon but the broader culture has replaced these concerns with concerns about what you think about .02% of the population and what happened to them in the past by people that weren't you or anyone you've ever known

 

[Fbh]

As in getting into legal trouble? Honestly, I don't know.
I guess it's one of those weird western things like how highly detailed gore and murder is a great in videogames but don't you dare show boobs.

And just in general I guess it's because no one wants to pay for shit so almost everything online is free and supported by advertisement. So companies want to avoid being labelled as "promoting hate" or any of the 3 billion types of "phobias" because that'll scare away advertisers.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

They would probably argue seeing people die is natural, it's inherently somewhat fascinating to most people, not being able to look away from a trainwreck being a common phrase. We are curious about those things.

The word fag though is demonstrating that a worldview still exists that the PC culture wants to eliminate.

I get that, the old public executions and hangings or yesteryear, sure.

Not just that word though, many words or world views are either frowned upon or will have you instantly removed from 'the internet' and have ramifications in real life.

You're asking why is woke culture taking over and it's a pretty big question, not sure I can answer that comprehensively.

But the fact is, woke culture cares more about "social justice" and writing historical wrongs than it does things more normal people might be concerned with like people's ability to access extremely violent and hyper sexual media. These things likely advance the woke agendas in certain ways, they used to be more frowned upon but the broader culture has replaced these concerns with concerns about what you think about .02% of the population and what happened to them in the past by people that weren't you or anyone you've ever known

If the Why to censorship is 'woke' culture, and the reason we don't/can't pushback is because what Fbh says above (due to advertisers) then a worse set of questions come up:

• Is woke culture more financially rewarding than no censorship
• Is it social conditioning? (That could be for either positive or negative reasons)

 

[King of Foxes]

Why?

I can watch five black fellas ram-rod an 18 year old white lass.
I can watch some guy get cut in half with a chainsaw
I can order enough drugs to kill myself, or others

Yet i can't call someone a fag (even if using the words to describe a British Cigarette) just for the laugh.

This isn't a joke thread, nor is it aimed at Gaf (which is the most open forum that i'm aware of).

I want to know sensible, adult reasons, as why i can view some of the most fucked-up acts of humanity, 24/7, but the text i type are the words of Satan.

you are a fag

 

[Mistake]

You're asking why is woke culture taking over and it's a pretty big question, not sure I can answer that comprehensively.

But the fact is, woke culture cares more about "social justice" and writing historical wrongs than it does things more normal people might be concerned with like people's ability to access extremely violent and hyper sexual media. These things likely advance the woke agendas in certain ways, they used to be more frowned upon but the broader culture has replaced these concerns with concerns about what you think about .02% of the population and what happened to them in the past by people that weren't you or anyone you've ever known

many of the woke are hyper-sexual in one way or another, so it’s not really a counterpoint. A lot of people speculate that virtue signaling has replaced religion in its absence. Seeing the results of a communal effort, even negative, has rewards in their mind. It’s the definition of a cult

 

[IntentionalPun]

Eh.. there's lots of websites that censor porn, like this one.

And lots of websites that let you call people fags..

Soooooo...

 

[Super Mario]

Why?

I can watch five black fellas ram-rod an 18 year old white lass.

That is celebrating people of color and strong woman empowerment. Two of the best things you can spend your time on watching.

 

[lock2k]

many of the woke are hyper-sexual in one way or another, so it’s not really a counterpoint. A lot of people speculate that virtue signaling has replaced religion in its absence. Seeing the results of a communal effort, even negative, has rewards in their mind. It’s the definition of a cult

This is a great way of explaining it.

 

[Nymphae]

 

[Elektro Demon]

Internet was awesome till 2010. From there it's all downhill. Too many normies have started to use the internet and it's mainstream. Once something is mainstream and normies flood in, it's the end.

 

[teezzy]

Because the hipsters won

First it was organic veggies, then it was Ghostbusters 2016, everything is ironic and nothing is safe.

 

[FreedomOfSpeech]

Woke culture lives because the nonwoke allow it.
Every time you comply, they win.

Therefore it is imperative that you are financially independent, so they hold no power over you.
If everyone keeps giving in, nobody is going to stand up. This is how mob rule lives.

Jordan Peterson says something like: Become strong enough so that when you are presented with the choice, you are able to choose the right thing.

 

[CalmYe]

I mean most major websites would censor the 1st two or atleast put up NSFW warning and as for the 3rd one, I am pretty sure that is illegal depending on where you live.
The problem I believe is you using that word for someone is more of a personal attack and let's be honest the word has been used in a derogatory manner historically. You may not intend to use it that way but it would still carry 'that' meaning. Same for the word 'retard'. It is a fun word and I was shocked it had been 'blacklisted' because I honestly thought it was used for idiots not those who have mental issues.

I personally avoid using such words as I have seen my friend getting cyberbullied and the effects on him. You may call me a 'fag' or 'retard' and I might not have any problem but you never know about how some random person on the other end might respond. It may have some adverse effects on that person which you may not have intended to inflict.
Those are definitely horrible acts but I think they are isolated enough from the internet (for most cases) that unless you seek them, you will not be subjected to them. You can use such words on sites like 4chan (and subreddits too) I think without any repercussion. It's about the communities you are using such words in.

 

[CalmYe]

^I am not advocating any cancellation of a person or anything over usage of such words, I believe such steps are extreme and wrong. I think ending conversation with someone does not help your case at all.

 

[lock2k]

Internet was awesome till 2010. From there it's all downhill. Too many normies have started to use the internet and it's mainstream. Once something is mainstream and normies flood in, it's the end.

Wild west internet was the best. We should find a middleground between the dark web and the regular web and leave the idiots in the dust. Sanitized web sucks.

 

[FreedomOfSpeech]

Wild west internet was the best. We should find a middleground between the dark web and the regular web and leave the idiots in the dust. Sanitized web sucks.

Pay for your content so you can vote with your wallet.

 

[nkarafo]

Here's how i see it.


The "black fellas ram-roding a 18 year old" videos are limited to porn sites. You won't see that on social media or most mainstream forums/sites.

A guy getting cut by a chainsaw is also limited to shock/gore sites or obscure shock related material forums. Again, you won't see that on social media or most mainstream forums/sites.

Same thing applies for naughty words. You won't see them on social media or most mainstream forums/sites. But you will see them in many more obscure sites or forums like the above. Shock/gore sites in particular don't mind people using these words. So far i would say these places are the most politically incorrect outside the deep web.


So in conclusion, all that stuff seems equally censored to me.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

I mean most major websites would censor the 1st two or atleast put up NSFW warning and as for the 3rd one, I am pretty sure that is illegal depending on where you live.
The problem I believe is you using that word for someone is more of a personal attack and let's be honest the word has been used in a derogatory manner historically. You may not intend to use it that way but it would still carry 'that' meaning. Same for the word 'retard'. It is a fun word and I was shocked it had been 'blacklisted' because I honestly thought it was used for idiots not those who have mental issues.

I personally avoid using such words as I have seen my friend getting cyberbullied and the effects on him. You may call me a 'fag' or 'retard' and I might not have any problem but you never know about how some random person on the other end might respond. It may have some adverse effects on that person which you may not have intended to inflict.
Those are definitely horrible acts but I think they are isolated enough from the internet (for most cases) that unless you seek them, you will not be subjected to them. You can use such words on sites like 4chan (and subreddits too) I think without any repercussion. It's about the communities you are using such words in.

Interesting point. However, if using 'fag' or 'retard' as a derogatory remark is the reason for censorship, then why aren't more or all words banned? For example, i could say:

"What are you?! some kind of fucking stupid idiot nazi? Do you literally want trans people to be killed? You should be fired from your job and ran out of town you fucking bigot"

None of those words are banned, the sentence has the same effect as calling a homosexual a 'fag' - as in, it's a character assassination based on hate - yet one is blanket banned, the other isn't.







Circling back to censorship and ramifications, what would happen if an employer found out that i was using 'hateful' language on 4chan? What if Facebook bought 4Chan tomorrow and 'doxxed' (via 'linking' your 4chan account to your facebook account) all 4chan users? What would the real world repurcussions be?

Here's how i see it.


The "black fellas ram-roding a 18 year old" videos are limited to porn sites. You won't see that on social media or most mainstream forums/sites.

A guy getting cut by a chainsaw is also limited to shock/gore sites or obscure shock related material forums. Again, you won't see that on social media or most mainstream forums/sites.

Same thing applies for naughty words. You won't see them on social media or most mainstream forums/sites. But you will see them in many more obscure sites or forums like the above. Shock/gore sites in particular don't mind people using these words. So far i would say these places are the most politically incorrect outside the deep web.


So in conclusion, all that stuff seems equally censored to me.

Porn is on Instagram, which is social media

Facebook hosted a video of a guy getting cut in half with a chainsaw when they dropped the restriction of 18+ videos on their platform (which is the reason i quit facebook.) Not to mention the videos of people getting killed, beaten and shot to death hosted on Twitter.

I see hateful, vile and generally disgusting shit said on social media all of the time. Just because they don't use fag or the n*gger, doesn't reduce the intent of hatred and in some cases, pushing violence.

So IMO, none of it is 'equally censored'. Which comes back to my point, why is it censored? Why are some things OK and others not? Who invented or designed the list of OK and N-OK words?[/ispoiler][/spoiler]

 

[teezzy]

S Slings and Arrows

Because 'fag' is a slur against homosexuals, and 'retard' is a slur against the mentally disabled.

'bigot' and 'nazi' are way too overused as false accusations in modern times, but they're meant to slander against those holding harmful ideologies as opposed to express hatred against someone for their sexual preferences, the color of their skin, or their disability.

Do you really not see the difference or are you being purposefully obtuse?

 

[wolfmat]

The platforms you're referring to deem it sensible to treat these words specially. Others may not. I think that's basically it.
They're free to do so, too, for reasons they themselves have to challenge; it's their platforms. If you want to understand these reasons, and why they were seen as acceptable policy, you'd have to go platform by platform.

I think in most cases, it's like this: "This random person uploaded a video with the word fagcunt in the title, and it's preluded by advertisers' content they pay for to be placed there; these advertisers may not like seeing the word fagcunt next to their ads because they fear being associated with rude behavior, so to keep making that easy ad money without unnecessary controversy, let's just restrict putting words like fagcunt in titles". And that reasoning then kind of takes on a life of its own. That's a big part of it all imho.

 

[GymWolf]

Yeah but what about pixelated vags\dicks in asian porn tho?!

 

[Slings and Arrows]

S Slings and Arrows

Because 'fag' is a slur against homosexuals, and 'retard' is a slur against the mentally disabled.

'bigot' and 'nazi' are way too overused as false accusations in modern times, but they're meant to slander against those holding harmful ideologies as opposed to express hatred against someone for their sexual preferences, the color of their skin, or their disability.

Do you really not see the difference or are you being purposefully obtuse?

Fag and retard are used as a slur, as you said. However, Bigot and Nazi are, IMO, weighted just the same as Fag and retard. They're all words.

If i was going to be obtuse i would point out that calling a single homosexual person a fag, is nowhere near as severe in it's accusation as accusing someone who was complicit in the genocide of 6 million people, based on their ideology.

Then I have to ask, what is a 'harmful ideology'? It can be argued that Homosexuality is harmful or that mental handicaps can be harmful. It wouldn't be a popular discussion, because of how we are as civilised and passive people and i doubt most people could disconnect themselves from their own belief systems long enough to understand how there is no difference between words. They are all created equally and balanced the same, we as users of words put our own weight on to them.

 

[wolfmat]

Yeah but what about pixelated vags\dicks in asian porn tho?!

That's a Japanese thing mostly, it's some historic glitch that never got corrected afaik (they started censoring junk and never stopped)

 

[Slings and Arrows]

The platforms you're referring to deem it sensible to treat these words specially. Others may not. I think that's basically it.
They're free to do so, too, for reasons they themselves have to challenge; it's their platforms. If you want to understand these reasons, and why they were seen as acceptable policy, you'd have to go platform by platform.

I think in most cases, it's like this: "This random person uploaded a video with the word fagcunt in the title, and it's preluded by advertisers' content they pay for to be placed there; these advertisers may not like seeing the word fagcunt next to their ads because they fear being associated with rude behavior, so to keep making that easy ad money without unnecessary controversy, let's just restrict putting words like fagcunt in titles". And that reasoning then kind of takes on a life of its own. That's a big part of it all imho.

Thank you for this. It's an interesting point.

In a round-about way, would it be safe to assume that the internet, or large portions of the 'popular' internet, are not free? As in, for an internet company to survive it must sell it's product (the popularity of the internet) and agree to terms and conditions set down by the company, who in turn take their market research from what is popular on the internet?

 

[teezzy]

S Slings and Arrows

Because with the former you're attacking someone for the way they're born and then the others are targeted towards someone being hateful against someone because of the way they're born.

You learn racism or homophobia over time, you're not born with it.

 

[GymWolf]

That's a Japanese thing mostly, it's some historic glitch that never got corrected afaik (they started censoring junk and never stopped)

I just thought that asian porn directors were cheap as fuck (purn intended) and used shitty low def cameras to record the coitus...

 

[Turnt]

The kinda boring answer is advertisers. Most sites rely on it. The majority of advertisers don’t want their products linked to homophobic language or stuff like that. It’s why 4chan has struggled to be sustainable.

You can watch that 18 year old getting fucked on Pornhub, but Coca Cola isn’t going to pay to have their adverts next to it.

 

[wolfmat]

Thank you for this. It's an interesting point.

In a round-about way, would it be safe to assume that the internet, or large portions of the 'popular' internet, are not free? As in, for an internet company to survive it must sell it's product (the popularity of the internet) and agree to terms and conditions set down by the company, who in turn take their market research from what is popular on the internet?

Well... The internet is corporate territory for the most part, sure. The same still applies to less corporate platforms, too. And some countries have laws that practically force any site with user-generated content to enforce playing nice.
I didn't really understand what you were trying to say in the part with market research, honestly. But yeah. The big thing is being able to place ads without any repercussions for most sites.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

S Slings and Arrows

Because with the former you're attacking someone for the way they're born and then the others are targeted towards someone being hateful against someone because of the way they're born.

You learn racism or homophobia over time, you're not born with it.

I'm not hand-waving your point away, I know where you're coming from. Unfortunately, to go further with it would be diving head-first in to a philosophical debate.

I don't see racism or homophobia as good or bad as it depends entirely on the situation, not to mention that homosexuality is still debated as to whether it's nature or nurture and i don't want to touch that with a 10ft barge-pole.

 

[teezzy]

I'm not hand-waving your point away, I know where you're coming from. Unfortunately, to go further with it would be diving head-first in to a philosophical debate.

I don't see racism or homophobia as good or bad as it depends entirely on the situation, not to mention that homosexuality is still debated as to whether it's nature or nurture and i don't want to touch that with a 10ft barge-pole.

I guess?

Still, I'm just gonna say that's your answer right there.

 

[wolfmat]

homosexuality is still debated as to whether it's nature or nurture and i don't want to touch that with a 10ft barge-pole.

You just did though

 

[CalmYe]

Interesting point. However, if using 'fag' or 'retard' as a derogatory remark is the reason for censorship, then why aren't more or all words banned? For example, i could say:

"What are you?! some kind of fucking stupid idiot nazi? Do you literally want trans people to be killed? You should be fired from your job and ran out of town you fucking bigot"

None of those words are banned, the sentence has the same effect as calling a homosexual a 'fag' - as in, it's a character assassination based on hate - yet one is blanket banned, the other isn't.







Circling back to censorship and ramifications, what would happen if an employer found out that i was using 'hateful' language on 4chan? What if Facebook bought 4Chan tomorrow and 'doxxed' (via 'linking' your 4chan account to your facebook account) all 4chan users? What would the real world repurcussions be?

I honestly believe many people who claim to be politically correct follow a bandwagon and are hypocrites too and fail to see it. Calling someone a nazi is wrong IMO and that too based on probably a one sentence social media interaction. Also, Nazis were prominent 80 years ago so I think it's like that S4 episode of Rick and morty where they mocked hiroshima bombing but thought 9/11 was too soon and didn't mock it even though the former was more devastating.

I feel a huge problem is people lack critical thinking skills too and just follow what everyone is doing. I have seen people make racist jokes about Indians and other Asians but those same people would put a BLM hash tag on their SM handles. They should theoretically stand against all kinds of racism and IMO everyone should and not just because it is trending now.

About employer stuff, I think you will probably get sacked even though you maybe shouldn't have (depends on the context of your usage) as a lot of the context (presumably between you and your friend on the SM site)would be lost. But I don't know honestly how would your employer know if you really meant the words you used in their traditional sense or you meant to use them jokingly with friends. I think this calls for tighter privacy laws.
I think your employer might sack you even if you accidentally shared some gory or NSFW stuff during a zoom meeting and it has happened too I believe so your point of unequal censorship doesn't stands here too.

I am on mobile so forgive my poor write-up.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

Well... The internet is corporate territory for the most part, sure. The same still applies to less corporate platforms, too. And some countries have laws that practically force any site with user-generated content to enforce playing nice.
I didn't really understand what you were trying to say in the part with market research, honestly. But yeah. The big thing is being able to place ads without any repercussions for most sites.

By market research i meant that at some point, ad companies have looked at what is popular, what isn't popular, what sells and what doesn't. I assume they've determined that slurs, attacks etc do damage to a product (though one could point to Woke campaigns like Gillett where the pendulum swings too far in the other direction).

If we use one very specific example, saying fag on the internet used to be nothing. nobody cared. People were more pissed off by grammar nazis. At some point, that word became damaging to the ad companies or whomever. Where did that point happen and why?

Chicken and egg/evolution. Which came first; ad money for people with less hateful speech, or people complaining about hateful speech?

You just did though

Yeah i did. I meant i don't want to take sides one way or the other, but it's still a scientifically interesting topic.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

I honestly believe many people who claim to be politically correct follow a bandwagon and are hypocrites too and fail to see it. Calling someone a nazi is wrong IMO and that too based on probably a one sentence social media interaction. Also, Nazis were prominent 80 years ago so I think it's like that S4 episode of Rick and morty where they mocked hiroshima bombing but thought 9/11 was too soon and didn't mock it even though the former was more devastating.

I feel a huge problem is people lack critical thinking skills too and just follow what everyone is doing. I have seen people make racist jokes about Indians and other Asians but those same people would put a BLM hash tag on their SM handles. They should theoretically stand against all kinds of racism and IMO everyone should and not just because it is trending now.

About employer stuff, I think you will probably get sacked even though you maybe shouldn't have (depends on the context of your usage) as a lot of the context (presumably between you and your friend on the SM site)would be lost. But I don't know honestly how would your employer know if you really meant the words you used in their traditional sense or you meant to use them jokingly with friends. I think this calls for tighter privacy laws.
I think your employer might sack you even if you accidentally shared some gory or NSFW stuff during a zoom meeting and it has happened too I believe so your point of unequal censorship doesn't stands here too.

I am on mobile so forgive my poor write-up.

Yes, our views are corralled by what is popular and where down the line did the internet, a bastion of free-speech and open communication, become a place where 'someone or someones' decided what words are acceptable?

Critical thinking is dead 100%. The amount of times i've been called a homophobe and racist for asking genuine questions, is pretty depressing tbh. Is being called a homophobe incorrectly, the same as been accused of being a fag? For example, it is socially unacceptable to say that pakistanis or Indians smell. However, i can call the French a bunch of cheese-eating surrender monkeys who stink of garlic and baguettes and nobody bats an eye-lid, some may even chuckle. What's the difference? (in reality everyone smells. White people smell of wet dog. Source: Pakistani friends)

There are examples of high profile people - thought i don't doubt it happens to average Joe - being fired for using certain words in private emails or text messages, or even making jokes, which were taken out of context.

It was a good write up. Cheers for putting the effort in on mobile.

 

[DogofWar]

Because people are sensitive and take offense by such words, so they are not allowed everywhere.
This is in theory an interesting discussion to have, but tend to get too heated and emotional so I will try and avoid it. But one question that I will ask to the people who think certain words are offensive and should be censored:

Who decides what words are offensive? If I find something offensive, would you stop using it even if you thought I was stupid? (ok two questions...)

 

[wolfmat]

If we use one very specific example, saying fag on the internet used to be nothing. nobody cared. People were more pissed off by grammar nazis. At some point, that word became damaging to the ad companies or whomever. Where did that point happen and why?

Can't answer that easily. Maybe the YT scandals were a big turning point? I'm really not sure though.

Chicken and egg/evolution. Which came first; ad money for people with less hateful speech, or people complaining about hateful speech?

I think it's the complaining people. Companies try to sail smoothly with their ads as well. As long as noone said anything, in the YT example, they didn't give a fuck. But then things spiralled out of control with Pewdiepie and all that, some bigger far-right videos and conspiracy videos with ads were the talk of the town, and eventually companies became wary and started to build up pressure. Some even boycotted YT ads altogether for a while, as you may remember. But that was a long while after the controversy about ad placement started.

 

[Slings and Arrows]

Can't answer that easily. Maybe the YT scandals were a big turning point? I'm really not sure though.

I think it's the complaining people. Companies try to sail smoothly with their ads as well. As long as noone said anything, in the YT example, they didn't give a fuck. But then things spiralled out of control with Pewdiepie and all that, some bigger far-right videos and conspiracy videos with ads were the talk of the town, and eventually companies became wary and started to build up pressure. Some even boycotted YT ads altogether for a while, as you may remember. But that was a long while after the controversy about ad placement started.

That's a very interesting point. Ads that nobody complained about become more desirable for companies to use vs ads that people saw as offensive or in bad taste, which were then negatively associated (is that the right way round?) with those ad companies. Survival of the fittest played out in internet ad form. That's pretty cool.

 

[Ultra Violento]

Because nowadays straight men bad, gay men good no matter what they do or how they treat others. No that's irrelevant, gay = saint, straight = satan himself.

 

[TrainedRage]

Because children can access it. There needs to be types of barriers so that society will not devolve into some pool of filth.

I get that parents should monitor kids usage but it’s not realistic 100% of the time.

If I had kids I would be more worried. For adults online I believe there should be little to no censorship or bars to view/discus things.

 

[#Phonepunk#]

the internet is a form of media and forms of media have always been censored

people need to do more reading about history. they were burning books in public during the medieval era, now they are banning Alex Jones from saying things in public during modern times. the platform holders destroy his works and remove access to the free market while the yellow press and social media (which, they had that back then, analog as it was) spreads gossip and rumor and character assassination, which helps convince people that silencing someone is ok. because they are a "bad guy." all the same tactics.

the rulers want to silence people through controlling a platform. it used to be they would ban translations of the Bible that were not in official Latin. people who would write a new translation in, say, German, would have that burned, as it was an affront to the orthodox narrative, printed in the Latin books. they burned books publicly in order to serve as an example to others. this also is why the current ones censor the President in public. it is as much about sending a message to the rest of us as it is controlling information.

this is why the establishment still (falsely) says "people were illiterate during the medieval period", because if they did not know the official language of Latin (or French, the language of aristocracy) then the ruling class considered them illiterate. it did not matter if there was a folk language that was spoken and written and had literature, it was considered barbaric, to an extent uncivilized. painting someone as uncivilized is a technique of dehumanization. the ruling class will always dehumanizing the people they oppress. this is why the media is currently obsessed with demonizing and deplatforming conservatives. they see it as a genuine threat to the status quo. the leftists, even the far left, are no threat, they are in fact on the side of the oppressors. no reason to deplatform them.

it's an old game, been going on for a long time, at least hundreds of years before anyone ever heard the word "capitalism".