3576 upvotes, 61 direct replies (showing 25)
View submission: Let's talk content. AMA.
Hello Steve.
You said the other day[1] that "Neither Alexis nor I created reddit to be a bastion of free speech". As you probably are aware by now, reddit remembers differently. Here are just a few of my favourite quotes, articles and comments which demonstrate that reddit has in fact long trumpeted itself as just that - a bastion of free speech.
A reddit ad, uploaded March 2007[2]:
2: https://sp.reddit.com/freespeech.jpg
Save freedom of speech - use reddit.com.
You, Steve Huffman, on why reddit hasn't degenerated into Digg, 2008[3]:
I suspect that it's because we respect our users (at least the ones who return the favor), are honest, and don't censor content.
You, Steve Huffman, 2009[4]:
4: https://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/8k6wx/reddits_decline_in_democracy/c09k4k3
We've been accused of censoring since day one, and we have a long track record of not doing so.
Then-General Manager Erik Martin, 2012[5]:
5: https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/iuz8a/iama_reddit_general_manager_ama/c26uuxb?context=3
We're a free speech site with very few exceptions (mostly personal info) and having to stomach occasional troll reddit like picsofdeadkids or morally quesitonable reddits like jailbait are part of the price of free speech on a site like this.
reddit blogpost, 2012[6] (this one is my favourite):
6: https://www.reddit.com/r/blog/comments/pmj7f/a_necessary_change_in_policy/
At reddit we care deeply about not imposing ours or anyone elses’ opinions on how people use the reddit platform. We are adamant about not limiting the ability to use the reddit platform even when we do not ourselves agree with or condone a specific use.
[...]
We understand that this might make some of you worried about the slippery slope from banning one specific type of content to banning other types of content. We're concerned about that too, and do not make this policy change lightly or without careful deliberation. We will tirelessly defend the right to freely share information on reddit in any way we can, even if it is offensive or discusses something that may be illegal.
Then-CEO Yishan Wong, October 2012[7]:
We stand for free speech. This means we are not going to ban distasteful subreddits. We will not ban legal content even if we find it odious or if we personally condemn it.
reddit's core values, May 2015[8]:
8: http://www.redditblog.com/2015/05/were-sharing-our-companys-core-values.html
* Allow freedom of expression.
* Be stewards, not dictators. The community owns itself.
And of course (do I even need to add it?) Alexis Ohanian *literally* calling reddit a bastion of free speech, February 2012[9]. Now with bonus Google+ post saying how proud he is of that quote[10]!
There are many more examples, from yourself and other key figures at reddit (including Alexis), confirming that reddit has promoted itself as a centre of free speech, and that this belief was and is widespread amongst the corporate culture of reddit. If you want to read more, check out the new subreddit /r/BoFS (Bastion of Free Speech), which gathered all these examples and more in less than two days.
So now that you've had time to plan your response to these inevitable accusations of hypocrisy, my question is this: who do you think you are fooling Steve?
Comment by Grafeno at 16/07/2015 at 20:19 UTC*
774 upvotes, 12 direct replies
This should be the top comment, too bad you weren't slightly earlier.
**We will tirelessly defend the right to freely share information on reddit in any way we can, even if it is offensive or discusses something that may be illegal.**
This is definitely the best part.
Comment by maroonedscientist at 16/07/2015 at 20:31 UTC
28 upvotes, 2 direct replies
I like all of your points, except for your last question. It's not productive to ask who anyone is trying to fool, it's more productive to ask how, when, and why his perception of what Reddit should be has changed, and to what degree that perceptual shift is going to be forced on the community.
Comment by [deleted] at 16/07/2015 at 20:25 UTC
38 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Don't forget Aaron Swartz speaking out against censorship in the private sphere:
Comment by DV_9 at 16/07/2015 at 20:19 UTC
314 upvotes, 12 direct replies
this aint gonna get answered... i bet my 3 sheep it aint...
Comment by DefinitelyNotSpez at 16/07/2015 at 20:42 UTC
11 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Reddit clearly has a long list of great speakers who have said many great things. We believe in free speech for everyone in the whole world, as long as it doesn't offend our advertisers.
Comment by rigglebutt at 16/07/2015 at 21:23 UTC
4 upvotes, 4 direct replies
I've left this regarding the "initial intent" of Reddit multiple times and have been downvoted. Still, the arguments around free speech are treating Reddit like it's government, which it is not. Still, entertaining the argument, this is what Thomas Jefferson (who keeps being cited for opinions on free speech) thought about original intent:
"We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."
If Reddit is changing, it's changing for the better and we no longer have to wear the coat where /r/rapingwomen was okay.
Comment by dvdcr at 16/07/2015 at 20:52 UTC
7 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Nice job in this, probably won't be answered because he is full of shit.
Just ban everything you think is bannable and be done with it. But you know you will kill Reddit if you do so... and money talks, so stop with the bullshit.
Comment by [deleted] at 16/07/2015 at 23:09 UTC*
44 upvotes, 2 direct replies
[deleted]
Comment by brybell at 16/07/2015 at 21:04 UTC
8 upvotes, 0 direct replies
aaaaand of course no answer to the best question. Oh what an illusion transparency is.
Comment by ReKaYaKeR at 16/07/2015 at 20:15 UTC
31 upvotes, 3 direct replies
This. SO much this.
Tired of people going back on their word and ideals to make fucking money. Reddit should grow a backbone and not kowtow to the *board*.
Comment by [deleted] at 16/07/2015 at 20:14 UTC
36 upvotes, 1 direct replies
http://i.imgur.com/0mKXcg1.gif
Comment by afcarv at 17/07/2015 at 03:00 UTC*
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
I'd like to paste this quote by Murray Rothbard on freedom of speech:
So basically, any talk of freedom of speech on Reddit is pretty much a bunch of bullshit unless Reddit finds a way to sell/rent portions of it to customers or investors, who may then be able to do whatever they want with their own space/subreddit. However, given that Reddit would still own the platform and servers, they would still be liable to any content hosted on it, so some kind of policy would be needed. I think a proper freedom of speech guarantee would require a transformation of Reddit from an website to a distributed content platform which users could host on their own servers, and thus, claim its property and any responsibilities attached to it. This is a major, major shift, though, and very unlikely to happen.
Comment by Magnivox at 16/07/2015 at 21:36 UTC
2 upvotes, 0 direct replies
There is no way this gets answered.
They are trying to monetize the site and it's hard for advertisers to pay for a site where content is treated equally and people are allowed to say what they want
Comment by bbnn at 17/07/2015 at 12:38 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Occasionally, someone would start spewing hate, and I would ban them. The community rarely questioned me. When they did, they accepted my reasoning: “because I don’t want that content on our site.”
As we grew, I became increasingly uncomfortable projecting my worldview on others. More practically, I didn’t have time to pass judgement on everything, so I decided to judge nothing.
This (the part that's full of shit) is eerily similar to what moot said before a similar content crackdown occurred last year on 4chan.
It might make you think they have similar motivations. The only difference is that moot eventually gave up on monetizing 4chan, but these guys are still giving it a shot. The only question is, how far are they willing to push it?
So we entered a phase that can best be described as Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. This worked temporarily, but once people started paying attention, few liked what they found. A handful of painful controversies usually resulted in the removal of a few communities, but with inconsistent reasoning and no real change in policy.
This part is actually telling the truth, but using weasel words: "people" meaning mainstream media, and "resulted in" meaning "we caved to media pressure."
Comment by le_f at 16/07/2015 at 20:53 UTC
7 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Steve is a coward, you won't get a real answer
Comment by Contronatura at 16/07/2015 at 21:17 UTC
6 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Inb4 no response
Comment by emodius at 16/07/2015 at 23:27 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Yeah. That bitch got told by the board.
Look, I think coontown is a bastion of idiots, but I think we all see where this is going. They will modify slightly the definitions and categories to suit their purposes, then censor or ban it.
This is what they did with Pluto, on some level. They didnt bother to say that it wasn't a planet until they put in place some arbirarily, and hastily concocted rules specifically designed to exclude it. You can make a case for both sides, but when ypu create a new ruleset, you look dirty.
Keep coontown up. As horrible as it is.
Edit: typo, summary
Comment by pjokinen at 16/07/2015 at 22:22 UTC
4 upvotes, 1 direct replies
But clearly there is a difference between free speech and unlimited free speech, is there not?
Comment by Scylithe at 17/07/2015 at 00:46 UTC*
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
I'm sure it's much wiser to answer this instead of purposefully ignoring it, /u/spez. It'll just keep coming up until you admit you screwed up. Everyone will hate you for it, but at least it won't be mentioned again.
E: well it looks like you're ignoring all tough questions and answering the easy ones ...
Comment by Daftney_Punk at 17/07/2015 at 03:49 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
Reddit is corporate now, if they don't sensor they'll lose advertisers and shareholders, and are the target for lawsuits. Time to move on to the next start up, build it until it gets too big and sells out, and move on again. It's the circle of life.
Comment by ncolaros at 16/07/2015 at 20:41 UTC
1 upvotes, 1 direct replies
I want to point out that him saying Reddit was not created to be a bastion of free speech doesn't contradict anything else he said. Something can become something you didn't expect or plan it to. For a while, Reddit was a bastion of free speech. It hasn't been for a very long time (how long ago did they ban child pornography?). That isn't hypocritical.
Comment by itsmrstealyogirl at 17/07/2015 at 00:11 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
from here on out they're saying that things without their own IDEOLOGIES won't get banned (/r/Nazism, /r/coontown) but things that harass people directly will be. I know I'll get down voted but there's a clear distinction
Comment by [deleted] at 16/07/2015 at 20:37 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
it's their vision, why can't they change it? reddit is vastly different than it once was (believe it or not i started on reddit socially progressive ideals like feminism were much more popular. racist jokes or "scientific" racism were downvoted to hell and deleted).
the community can't vastly change without a philosophy change. it must adapt.
Comment by OhanianIsALiar at 16/07/2015 at 23:44 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
LOL at how badly it backfired on Altman to bring back the old guard - Huffman and Ohanian - so Redditors can hear them sell out and publicly denounce their own core principles. :)
Comment by roothorick at 16/07/2015 at 20:54 UTC
0 upvotes, 1 direct replies
Steve left Reddit in 2009, meaning his first "term" concluded *six years ago*. Reddit has changed a lot in those six years -- Reddit Gold *didn't even exist yet*. The events of 2012 were under Yishan Wong, at a time of internal turmoil that eventually resulted in Ellen Pao taking the reins. But that's not hugely important...
Here's the fundamental thing: Things change. Especially on the Internet. Once a group gets to a certain size, allowing freedom of expression involves more than simply abstaining from censorship. In fact, you will have to censor those that through their belligerent expression silence others. *That's exactly what Steve is trying to say here.*
Of course, this is always a judgement call. But people acting like *any* censorship is degenerate and hypocritical is dangerous extremism. Gay rights wouldn't have gotten anywhere if the world thought that way.
