I feel like the two sides of this issue talk past one another constantly with this.
There’s a difference between censoring ideas you disagree with and modding purposefully malicious hate and disinformation campaigns. But whenever it comes up there’s no nuance allowed.
People seem to understand market failures and the role of regulators in weeding out malicious actors like scammers, thieves, misleading advertising, market manipulation, and insider trading. But there’s no room apparently to admit that the marketplace of ideas is subject to the same forces because not everyone is coming to the marketplace in good faith.
It’s easy to argue that there should be light touch regulation on such things and err on allowing speech that is “on the fence” when you’re not the one being harmed by it.
There’s a difference between censoring ideas you disagree with and modding purposefully malicious hate and disinformation campaigns. But whenever it comes up there’s no nuance allowed.
People seem to understand market failures and the role of regulators in weeding out malicious actors like scammers, thieves, misleading advertising, market manipulation, and insider trading. But there’s no room apparently to admit that the marketplace of ideas is subject to the same forces because not everyone is coming to the marketplace in good faith.
It’s easy to argue that there should be light touch regulation on such things and err on allowing speech that is “on the fence” when you’re not the one being harmed by it.