Discord vs FREE SPEECH!? nope. – The Know Tech News


Welcome to The Know. I’m Ashley. I’m Ben. Strap in folks. It’s time for a talk about free speech Earlier this week gaming chat heavyweight Discord shut down a public server for altright.com, a political group that was used for organizing protests in Charlottesville this last weekend and a number of other tech giant’s have also ejected the fringe political group from their services. Between Discord, Google, Reddit, Godaddy and others serving up some high profile bans the affected groups or those wearing their next are decrying the bans as the end of free speech online as we know it and the politicization of corporate corporations. Yeah, well I mean, yeah, There’s a little bit more nuance to free speech, and what’s happening with these bans. What is undeniable? Is that there has been a noteworthy change in the way online discussions are being policed by the Tech industry For a lot of years a lot of these good companies have been more or less hands-off except in the most extreme instances while still allowing certain types of language and communities to form on their platform, but there’s been a shift And it’s not just this week. We’ve seen YouTube tightening down on all kinds of content that they allow on their platforms and what they allow to be monetized, and that’s been going on for months. I keep getting emails that uh some of our videos are being demonetized. They’re all from like three years ago, but there’s one of like You know Mormons and the war against porn, and they’re like yeah, you can’t talk about that So yeah that has been happening with YouTube a lot Now more of these online platforms are taking a harder stance which is going to bring a few free speech discussions Particularly among those who are being banned and in some cases concerns about discrimination over personal beliefs Because people in general are pretty jumpy about slippery slopes. Also of being banned. No one wants to be banned Now before Yeah Before we get too far into what’s actually going on it is worth mentioning the event from Charlottesville this past weekend Not the focus of this story, we’re not a world news channel But we can’t talk about the recent bans without at least that much context By now you’re more than likely aware of the controversial and violent protests that took place in Charlottesville’s by white supremacists and Neo-Nazis one of whom drove a car into a crowd of counter protesters and killed a young woman and What we’re seeing now is a series of consequences to those events play out in the online space Thanks to a number of moves made by the popular web sources including Discord. Yeah So as to the Discord thing the popular gaming chat app made an announcement this week, Via Twitter informing users that it would be shutting down the altright.com server and other users involved with what went down in Charlottesville They wrote Discord’s mission is to bring people together around gaming. We’re about positivity and inclusivity not hate not violence They went on to say Today We’ve shut down the altright.com server and a number of other accounts associated with the events in Charlottesville We will continue to take action against white supremacy nazi ideology and all forms of hate. Now before anyone could accuse them of political bias, Discord’s defense of the shutdown Specifically actually has to do with terms of service violations. They are claiming that the accounts and servers shut down were specifically promoting or enabling the coordination of violence around Charlottesville by Several quote bad actors. And on top of that they don’t want some of those Viewpoints on their service at all Discord CMO Eros Resimini said We unequivocally condemn white supremacy, neo-nazism And any other group term ideology that is based on these beliefs. They are not welcome on Discord While we don’t read people’s private servers, our terms of service Explicitly forbid harassment threatening messages or calls to violence When hatred like this violates our community standards we act swiftly to take servers down and ban individual users Now several community members have since asked for the ban and removal of counter protesters who were also using Discord to coordinate and Discord said if They have specific complaints about abuse users can send an email to [email protected] And they would be happy to investigate it just as they did the accounts they’ve already banned. No, word yet though on any actions actually taken on that front though Naturally this whole thing is kicking off a big discussion about what else free speech. Free Speech! so we probably should talk a little bit about what it does and doesn’t protect. Yeah because there’s a lot of Misunderstandings actually contrary to popular belief free speech does include all kinds of speech even hate speech weirdly enough It was reaffirmed rather recently actually just back in June when the supreme court reached a unanimous ruling about the matter in Matal versus Tam. That case was about a band wanting to name itself after a term that could be considered racially expensive and the government Not allowing specific trademark protections for the band name because of it. The court ended up agreeing with the band that Yes, they can be named what they want. No one has to like it. No one has to agree with it No one has to think it’s tasteful But legally they’re allowed to name the thing that. Free speech protects citizens from reprisal by the government for dissenting opinions What isn’t protected by the first amendment is your ability to violate a private company’s terms of service agreement. By which they can technically end their contract with you for virtually any reason they feel like. Or no reason. Nah, it’s a loophole they can use to terminate services for any user they don’t want on the platform if those users violate certain clauses in the terms of service. Yeah, and this comes up less frequently in Tech But we have actually seen some weird versions of this play out in the real world Not the same thing at all as people being banned for hate speech online by the way or white supremacy or anything like that, but at least in the vein of consequences of our personal beliefs We did see some weird stuff with businesses. They were hit for refusing to render services like baking cakes. Um, bakeries were a big one for same-sex couples in recent years. In one of those cases the court did actually Order that It was discrimination and the bakery had to pay damages because laws in the state specifically prohibit companies from discriminating their services based on sexual orientation However bakeries, don’t exactly have a terms of service you have to sign before you walk in the door And that’s where these online companies are a little bit better protected in their actions. They can point to specific Violations to justify the Shutdowns and those terms can be pretty broad like Discord’s Which states the company may also terminate or suspend your access to any communication channels at any time without notice for any reason. Broad. Plus the bakery instances were also a little bit different. They are about discrimination rather than free speech They were refusing service because of someone’s identity Who they are rather than what they believe so not apples to apples. Now if someone had something discriminatory about beliefs or opinions in the terms of service in the first place that might be a little bit different story And if they have something in there, that’s about who you are something that you can’t change that’s more difficult to enforce legally. Yes Just a little bit. If anybody is unhappy with the way all this is set up They are free to take it to court so far We don’t have many instances of people taking a company to court over their terms of service But it did happen once a few years back there was a Schnabel versus Trilegiant Corp which was a Those sound like pretend TV names just by the way. Evil corporation trying to take over something They do Which was a class-action lawsuit brought against a program that offered discounts on products. The plaintiff wanted a full refund after several months but Trilegiant Corp wouldn’t grant it because it was explicitly stated in their terms of service. In that instance the Second circuit ruled against the company most because their terms of service weren’t conspicuous They were like this little tiny font at the bottom of their site, and then in a follow-up email that wasn’t specifically signed So another case again not apples to apples But since most people don’t have the money to start a long protracted legal battle with services like Discord the other option is to find Another service, and that’s about all there is to it because free speech is not about your ability to say whatever you want online so much as it is about your ability to say what you want and not get thrown in jail for it. And even then not completely Fighting words, calls to violence also, not allowed which brings this whole issue back to square one anyway So now technically Discord isn’t violating free speech by exercising bans for users who are making calls to violence And it’s not just Discord getting in on it either They’ve been just the most visible for those of us in the gaming sphere Godaddy removed white supremacist site The Daily Stormer from its domain hosting this week while google delisted it from their domain registry also for violating the terms of service. Oddly enough That website has ended up in Russia. Oh interesting AirBnb has been banning accounts for the same reason and both Facebook and reddit have also started shutting down numerous groups for hate speech in The last few days as well. And with all the shutdowns happening for all these various groups It seems like maybe we’re coming to a fork in the road for online discussion after several years of growing contention In the past sites like Twitter and reddit in particular have been pretty keen on allowing online discussions to continue Unregulated more or less But the events of Charlottesville and the growing threat of actual violence are definitely changing the positions of the tech industry’s heavy hitters also Because in this case the Company’s really really Understandably don’t want to be associated with white supremacy in any way and are motivated to take a very strong stance against it Because of all that there are some who are worried that they could one day be kicked off their social Media Platforms over personal beliefs too, quick clarification. We’re not talking about people who are in agreement with white supremacists we’re talking about others who while not sharing those extremist views do hold what they consider to be controversial opinions across all ends of the political spectrum, or Opinions that go against the grain and these shutdowns have some of those people concerned about the idea of who decides what hate speech is And what if I’m on the receiving end of it next year? So that’s typically a worry for people who don’t always see eye to eye with the rest of their online peers but really the key Takeaway here is Probably that the right to a freedom of speech isn’t the same as freedom from consequences your beliefs may not get you arrested But when you sign in to a privately operated platform you are also agreeing to abide by their terms And those may actually be worth reading once you sign in free speech Doesn’t apply. So by all means continue posting your memes and arguing about whose fault it Is that you’ve just got wasted in PUBG and yes even expressing your controversial opinions like that Sonic the Hedgehog was never that good of a video game. Fighting words, but legal. Might also kill me, but leave the inciting violence and racism at the door Okay, rule of thumb be excellent to each other. Bill and Ted have a lot to teach us. What do you guys think of these recent bans happening online from Discord and all these other services let us know in comments. For future updates on for the discussions about free speech remember to like this video, and if you’re new around here subscribe to The Know *wheezes* I think I just read the Declaration of independence, a lot of jargon. We get wordy hmm legal stuff. I’m gonna just going on time I done

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Post navigation

100 thoughts on “Discord vs FREE SPEECH!? nope. – The Know Tech News

  1. Someone needs to rein in what tech companies can add to terms of services. Often you pay for a service but can still lose your access to said service for basically anything.

  2. People forget these are all private platforms and allowed to censor their content in any way they choose. Ass three platform owners they are responsible for the recourse of any discussions made. Good riddance to these groups just the same.

  3. Delisting a website is preventing them from speaking online completely.

    Google is violating the law. Because their policies discriminate against people who disagree with them.

  4. The freedom of the internet is dying I grew up when internet was a place of absolute freedom and anarchy good days. good days.

  5. What we need is more protections for customers from these ToS Agreements that nobody reads and are yet are forced to sign them to use so many games (because, of course, games are now services and not products) Companies can put anything they want in there and the end user to search pages of legalese for something that isn't 'legal' , the onus should be on companies to create terms of service within guidelines with stiffer punishments to those companies who create unreasonable demands on people.

  6. I just find it shameful that Discord didn't add a picture of B. J. Blazkowicz from Wolfenstein 3D to their 'yes, indeed, we just banned the nazis" post. …Though I guess perhaps doing such would have been seen as a little flippant.

  7. I use Discord as my primary Chat Client. I don't like that Discord did this, but I can't blame them for kicking this kind of crowd off their platform. If they start kicking people without justifiable reason things will change.

    I hate to admit it but "We are GUEST'S in these service providers houses" their EULA spell that out.

  8. Too much tolerance causes intolerance. This has been proven time and time again.

    Being tolerant of intolerance causes these groups of pure hatred to surface and spread their intolerance like wildfire.

  9. "You can speak anywhere, but no-one has to listen, and if you're in their property, they can make you leave."

  10. Free Speech/1st Ammendment means you can say or believe anything you want, and the authorities/government will leave you alone. IT DOES NOT mean private companies owe you a platform for spreading those beliefs.

  11. Topic aside. That whole things wasn't scripted at all and was totally not robotic and was definitely super engaging.

  12. Free speech these days is just an excuse to spread hatred in too many situations. You don't allow pedophiles or crime syndicates to operate in the open, do you?

  13. I have no issues with removing the ability for racists to cause violence but will these same companies be blocking and banning organizations such as Antifa who have made calls to violence as a means of protest?

  14. I don't agree with Alt right or left but all should be allowed to have their own servers, even racist shitheads

  15. Violence get met with violence and the internet calls the right out. The left started it, why haven't they been banned? Beating up elderly white men, destroying private property, and inciting violence.

  16. Nobody remembers all the violence and destruction cause by antifa before this event? The KKK marched the day before without even a hint of violence. Speech is not violence.

  17. funny thing is the only group that is destroying shops and burning cars in my country for decades is antifa…but surely they are not a violent hate group

  18. Free speech gives you the right to say (almost) whatever you want, BUT IT DOES NOT give you the right to say (almost) whatever you want WHEREVER you want! /edit: also please stop using the term "alt right" it's just a different terminology for racism so call it for what it actually is…

  19. Warning: Stupid people actually defending Nazis, KKK and white supremacy in the comments. Also stupid people not understanding the First Amendment. Just stupid people in the comments.

  20. its sad that we as a country have to deal with the fact that we are either on the right with a bunch of Neo Natiz or on the left with a bunch of Neo Communist. people should make a push for a new center.

  21. other than their description of Charlottesville i admire their unbiased report of this. Also that discord text message section they showed was pretty funny.

  22. I wouldn't have a problem with this if they were consistent and only eliminating violence related chats. Too bad that isn't the case.

  23. All the butt-hurt neo-nazis in the comments section. Just to be clear, private services are not covered by the first amendment.

  24. Basically you best make your own website or go to the dark web. Smh

    It's a dam shame. As long as they not trying to plan attacks on social media sites. I say let them talk.

    Especially on a popular social media outlet. That way people know that it's still a thing.

    I understand why groups like utube and google would do this, but muffling a voice usually leads to more violence.

    And makes it harder to see these groups.

  25. While it might not be a violation of free speech ( as it is a private company) this very much is censorship particularly when it seems to just be applying to one side of the political argument.

  26. Black lives matter, ANTIFA and white supremacists all need to be shut down. They are all equally racist. They all promote violence. If they ban one they should ban them all. Th set are all sick and horrible groups.

  27. Are they also gonna shut down Islamic or Black/Hispanic, etc. platforms who are also "hateful" but get the minority bonus?
    Or this this once again a continuation of the "white man hunt" in recent years?

  28. hate to tell you, but 'inciting' is NOT protected by the first amendment. Supreme court decided on that years ago.
    Also, ToS for businesses. Don't like their ToS? find another business.
    That's not a "violation" of free speech.

  29. You're confusing the legal protection of free speech guaranteed in the first amendment, and the philosophical dedication to free speech. This is decidedly against the latter.

  30. Wow, no mention of BLM or Antifa hate groups. People like you are the ones growing the white nationalist movement, because you refuse to acknowledge the racism and hate coming from the other side.

  31. i say the web needs to say compleaty free as long as people don't insite violence anything else if free speech and should be ok but I think the free speech thing should be added to business

  32. YouTube demonetized 2 female black Trump supporters for having breakfast with fans.
    The only violence advocate was to some waffles.

  33. Why did you say there was a violent protest by white supremacists and neo nazis? You completely ignored all the leftist violence? interesting

  34. So a bakery can discriminate as long as it has a sign saying "we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason"?

  35. Once again this is proof that The-Know is Bias against the Right (Basically any Christian, Straight, White, Male)

  36. But ya know Antifa destroying property every week is totally ok to use all these platforms and call for violence to stop "nazis" at any cost. Totally fair 👌🏽

  37. Just because there is freedom of speech does not mean I have to listen. So if your facebook page, Discord server and is on is banned, they are just showing you the door and saying I'm not listening

  38. My primary is that they have been going after almost exclusively extremist content on the right side of the political spectrum. I have not seen these same platforms and service providers remove websites of a similar level of extremity that sit on the left side. Antifa, despite using their platforms for organisation and planning of events where they act, and often times planned to act beforehand, violently, have not been removed.

    There seems to be a particular political bias in the actions of these companies. The same thing can be seen in how Youtube has been demonetizing videos. They have been hitting almost exclusively political commentators on the right, centre – and even just left of centre, whilst nothing has been done to those on the extreme left.

  39. White Supremacists and Nazi's are hate groups and terrorists. We would not be having this discussion if ISIS decided to hold a protest in small town America.

  40. free speech vs oppressing groups who believe in ethnic cleansing………………..very big difference. Christ a group of people with no human decency spread hate online and some people ban them to avoid harassment since a lot of those nazis invaded servers and made it unsafe for people to just talk and discord bans them cause they breach the privacy and use of the service. God forbid we take away a factor harmful to others and especially impressionable kids who get influenced by these asshats

  41. I head to the comments section, I see everybody warning me not to head to the comments section, I get super excited and head to the comments section faster, I keep going and keep seeing warnings about the comment section being a warzone, my mind is racing and I'm excited to get to this warzone of a comments section, more warning telling me to turn back now, then finally I am at the end of the comments section… and I am warned to "turn back now, danger ahead"…. I am disappointed…

  42. Nazi's or not. Its a Opinion, you cannot silence a opinion. People should be free to share it with others.
    Edit: If you start silencing hate things will start to escalate, people will call to violence and if you try to keep everyone nice and happy we are closer to a Dystopian world then any of those games can show you.

  43. Let's see free speech. Protected by retribution from the government… Not private platforms. And certainly not for hate groups, and known terror cells.

  44. The problem is that most tech companies are usually very liberal. These giant corporations now control all forms of media, and consenting opinions could potentially be muffled.

  45. If you shut down people for spreading hate, that's ok. Freedom of speech means you can say what you want, not organize and attack people.

  46. The reason people are pissed off about this has nothing to do with free speech.

    It's because Antifa has been acting violent and injuring people for a long time and nothing was done about it, and the moment right wing people started fighting back all of a sudden its all "gasp, we need to do something about this"

    It is being seen as an overt attack on people who do not believe in leftist communist ideology.

    And given the history of everything, they are not wrong.

  47. Civil and political rights are a class of rights that protect individuals' freedom from infringement by governments, SOCIAL ORGANIZATIONS, and private individuals. They ensure one's ability to participate in the civil and political life of the society and state without discrimination or repression.
    a social organization is a pattern of relationships between and among individuals and social groups.[1][2]
    Characteristics of social organization can include qualities such as sexual composition, spatiotemporal cohesion, leadership, structure, division of labor, COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS, and so on.[3][4]

  48. As far as I'm concerned this doesn't have anything with the right to free speech. Discord is not infringing on any rights however that are declining to facilitate such hate groups. I agree with this choice and I would do the same.

  49. So I guess saying "kill all white people" isn't a call to violence. You just say it was a bad joke or you were taken out of context and you barely get a slap on the wrist. Make a stupid black joke or and your subjected to a full character assassination and a virtual village stoning.

  50. 4Chan will be the last safe-heaven for free speech.
    Sidenote: Yes, they're private business, entitled to do whatever they please. That does not, however, make their actions ok. Legal, yes. Fair? Good? Not necessarily.

  51. Here's a question: How is #Discord different from any internet provider, domain host, radio broadcast, newspaper, email server, mail, phone, private conversation, or any other medium when it comes to the kind of communication which can take place over it? What defines a private conversation on a specific medium from public speech? Because private speech does not fall under the purview of the 1st Amendment, and the government has taken action to regulate privately owned companies before in order to protect it.

    Because seriously, do you want cell carriers to start monitoring your conversations and messages for #Wrongthink like they do in #China?

  52. So basically: You can say what you want, but that doesn't mean everyone else has to deal with what you say. And also, terms of service.

  53. Supreme Court should just make a ruling in which no company or organizations are allowed to dictate speech. With exception of continued direct threat, and continued harassment.

  54. This video conflates the principle of free expression with the current legal protections for it (although in a couple places it correctly talks about what "the First Amendment" protects, rather than "free speech" as a principle of restraint that ought to bind any holder of power, not just the government).

  55. This video conflates the principle of free expression with the current legal protections for it (although in a couple places it correctly talks about what "the First Amendment" protects, rather than "free speech" as a principle of restraint that ought to bind any holder of power, not just the government).

  56. Discord wants to be inclusive. . . Then they flat out deny another viewpoint on their platform. . . . Yes, because censorship is totally inclusive.

  57. What is going on on Discord doesn't really concern me for I don't care about that platform.
    The free speech debate however is an important topic.

  58. This is no different to going to a bar, restaurant, pub, etc and being racist then being asked to leave by the staff.

    America's first amendment… is designed to stop your government from squashing people they don't like, which is what we see happening in certain other countries around the world.

    You can call Trump a bad president, I can call Turnbull a bad PM, etcetc and not go to jail… but in some countries, if you speak out against the leadership, You CAN go to jail… or worse… and that's what your first amendment is designed to protect against.

  59. Offense is always taken. Never given.
    You don't like someone's speech and it makes you mad? The hate is yours and not the speaker's.
    So many people so willing to kill freedom of thought, speech and association. So sad.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *