Substack, an online platform that is home to such writers as Bari Weiss and Glenn Greenwald, has already been targeted by the Left because right-wingers (and even left-wingers who stray from the narrative now and then) have set up shop there. It used to be white supremacists and militias were the danger, but now we’re learning it’s also anti-vaxxers, who are free to publish their newsletters on the site.
Mashable’s Meera Navlakha took a look at Substack and why these newsletters have been allowed to exist on the platform.
She writes:
So, why has this type of content been allowed to thrive on Substack, even in the midst of an ever-rising tide of COVID misinformation in digital spaces? According to the Center for Countering Digital Hate, more than 59 million people were reached by 425 anti-vaxxer accounts tracked by the organization in 2020 on social media platforms.
The answer seemingly lies in Substack’s self-proclaimed philosophy when it comes to censorship — the promotion of discourse, no matter what it may lead to. The company’s content guidelines, last updated in November 2021, emphasises its primary principle: “To be a safe place for discussion and expression.”
“We believe that critique and discussion of controversial issues are part of robust discourse, so we work to find a reasonable balance between these two priorities,” reads the post.
The Center for Countering Digital Hate? Who funds something like that?
The one true aim is not to control the flow of information and gatekeep it, but rather to facilitate the unadulterated exchange of communication. "Why are they allowed to exist" is antithetical to every fiber of this country's being.
— Phil (@RealPhillyP) January 25, 2022
It’s insane to hear jornos arguing that only some points of view should be allowed to be discussed. 🤯
FTR, fully vaxxed & boosted.
— GOATtb12 (@GOAT__TB12) January 25, 2022
You hate that you can’t control what others say.
— Augustina 🇻🇦 (@AugustinaJJD) January 25, 2022
Free speech. I wrote your article for you in two words, thanks.
— Zach Smith (@nobiggvt) January 25, 2022
Thanks for your input comrade
— Marc Horodas (@mhorodas) January 25, 2022
“Allowed to exist.” Who the hell do you think you are?
— Julie B (@juliesque720) January 25, 2022
That's the whole point of freedom of speech. Marketplace of ideas and such. Do you realize that in all of human history, there were many unpopular ideas that most people deemed to be 'misinformation' that were later proven true? Flat earth comes to mind.
— Sitara (@Bjorntobewild) January 25, 2022
You should really reevaluate things if the question of opinions beings “allowed to exist” or not enters your head
— Merf (@skulkingermine) January 25, 2022
https://twitter.com/Straight2Burner/status/1486003994782752779
"Allowed to exist". The sheer arrogance and misplaced self-righteousness is astounding.
— 🍁Danny Boy (@SomeCrazyCanuck) January 25, 2022
https://twitter.com/BeepBopBoop95/status/1486004346387116037
Inalienable. Look up the definition. Then sit down commie.
— 🇺🇸 Pissed Off Nation 🇺🇸 (@PhoenixRisingU) January 25, 2022
Allowed to exist? Screw off you pompous twit. The more people of your same mindset call for shutting down open discussions, the more of those discussions we are going to have and continue to have. What next? Trying to find the “final solution” against the “conservative problem”?
— JLK (@anticommie1777) January 25, 2022
She does note parenthetically that Substack is also home to white nationalists and QAnon influencers. And CNN is home to pedophiles, but you don’t see her mentioning that.
Related:
‘LMFAO! Get bent’! Blue-check’s attempt to ‘cancel’ Substack because it’s a ‘threat to journalism’ BACKFIRES hilariously https://t.co/0QLg98yADm
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) March 1, 2021
Join the conversation as a VIP Member