More than 200 Substack authors asked the platform to explain why it’s “platforming and monetizing Nazis,” and now they have an answer straight from co-founder Hamish McKenzie:

I just want to make it clear that we don’t like Nazis either—we wish no-one held those views. But some people do hold those and other extreme views. Given that, we don’t think that censorship (including through demonetizing publications) makes the problem go away—in fact, it makes it worse.

While McKenzie offers no evidence to back these ideas, this tracks with the company’s previous stance on taking a hands-off approach to moderation. In April, Substack CEO Chris Best appeared on the Decoder podcast and refused to answer moderation questions. “We’re not going to get into specific ‘would you or won’t you’ content moderation questions” over the issue of overt racism being published on the platform, Best said. McKenzie followed up later with a similar statement to the one today, saying “we don’t like or condone bigotry in any form.”

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    So let me get this straight… They don’t like Nazis, but Nazis not making money is worse than Nazis making money?

      • ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Anything related to sex or women’s sexuality that’s very bad.

        Letting Nazi’s spread their hate, that’s good.

        Says every social media, internet company ever.

    • CrayonMaster@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s the part that gets me. If it were just not removing content, well, I’d probably still complain but they’d have a coherent freedom of speech argument. But… they have to pay Nazis to make Nazi content and take a cut, otherwise it’s censorship and that somehow helps the Nazis?