> Obviously if someone's not happy with the content their company produces, they're free to look for a better fit elsewhere. But why spell it out like that?
Because people tend to forget that and intend to pressure their employer into changing its values, rather than simply changing their employer.
If Netflix views itself as a content library, rather than say, a content publisher then they could rightly say that they will keep certain content that's harmful to the community simply because that falls into the ethos of a library. Libraries (at least good ones in my opinion) keep Mein Kamphf on the shelves, even if no one in the library is a nazi and the only people checking them out are actual nazis (as opposed to college students writing papers). That the book is bad, doesn't mean that it ought to be burned.
So if Netflix is a library, then they're okay. However, this gets a bit muddy since not only collects content, but also actually publishes and promotes it themselves. Funding Chappelle, and publicizing it with huge billboards can be interpreted as support and not simply "we publish content that exists" since this harmful content might not exist if not for Netflix.
I think the quote above is necessary since Netflix has to clarify where it actually stands on this issue. They see it as a topic of 'personal' value, and not objective harm.
Because people tend to forget that and intend to pressure their employer into changing its values, rather than simply changing their employer.
If Netflix views itself as a content library, rather than say, a content publisher then they could rightly say that they will keep certain content that's harmful to the community simply because that falls into the ethos of a library. Libraries (at least good ones in my opinion) keep Mein Kamphf on the shelves, even if no one in the library is a nazi and the only people checking them out are actual nazis (as opposed to college students writing papers). That the book is bad, doesn't mean that it ought to be burned.
So if Netflix is a library, then they're okay. However, this gets a bit muddy since not only collects content, but also actually publishes and promotes it themselves. Funding Chappelle, and publicizing it with huge billboards can be interpreted as support and not simply "we publish content that exists" since this harmful content might not exist if not for Netflix.
I think the quote above is necessary since Netflix has to clarify where it actually stands on this issue. They see it as a topic of 'personal' value, and not objective harm.