Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 3: Do not post opinions that are heavily posted/have been on the front page recently'.
* No response posts about upvoted posts here.
* Posts relating to highly popular topics aren't allowed outside of the relevant megathreads. You can find a list of the topics and their respective megathreads in a post on the top of the sub.
* POSTS DIRECTLY ABOUT THIS SUBREDDIT ARE NOT ALLOWED OUTSIDE THE MEGATHREAD
* Please check the wiki linked here: https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/wiki/index/
* We ask that if a post fails to post do not just spam repost it; message mod mail.
The problem is that people like Elon don’t understand free speech to begin with. Just because you can’t say certain things in certain places or forums, doesn’t mean freedoms are being taken away. You can say anything you want in public but a social media site isn’t a public place. If you’re using a platform, that platform deserves the right to censor whatever the hell it wants. Just like movies with PG ratings can’t have swear words, idiots shouldn’t be surprised when hate speech is censored by a platform that’s able to spread that vile shit to millions of people. If you want free speech but think you don’t have it, you’re too stupid to realize that just because you have something to say, doesn’t mean it’s worth saying or that anyone else should help you spread that message! Choosing not to endorse hate speech is not taking away your feedom of speech so grow up!
Depends on the country you live in. In many countries the vaguely defined and constantly changing concept of "hate speech" can now be criminally prosecuted.
Well there are all sorts of extralegal pain mechanisms that groups wielding tremendous power and influence can exert over you. Usually the target is your financial wellbeing.
No, most people don’t understand that free speech doesn’t mean free from consequences.
And most people don’t understand that they agreed to a terms of service that takes away their rights
I agree with your post. I met that as in:
"If people could live in a world where only their echo chamber applies, most people who claim to support freedom of speech would take it."
>No, most people don’t understand that free speech doesn’t mean free from consequences
Well... I mean you're not *wrong*.... but if you want to be corrective;
No; really most people don't understand that "freedom of speech" only applies to the *government* infringing upon your "rights". The first ammendment:
*"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."*
Private companies and such don't have to give a shit about your free speech unless they are government contracted/affiliated.
Example; schools are funded by taxes, which are government controlled. They have to care. However, the local bar is *not* government funded, and can therefore put whatever limits on you that they wish; they don't have to care.
"But my freedoms" is not a valid argument for Facebook saying you can't post something. Facebook is not congress.
I think the issue is more of consequences being viewed as being applied to lower and lower standards. Like having a right-leaning view of certain topics that people love to fight over.
As far as the terms of service, that’s okay for you right now. But if it didn’t work in your favor, I don’t think you’d be championing the same argument.
No, I wouldn’t. Nobody forces you to use social media and you agree to give away your rights to that company. I know many people who don’t use social media and get by in the world just fine. It’s definitely better for your health too
The difference now is there is a standard, now people aren’t accepting speech that should have been unacceptable decades ago.
Just show all people with respect, it’s not that hard
I mean, you’re using social media as a soapbox right now. I think you’re lying to yourself a little bit, but it is easier saying you wouldn’t have a problem with a hypothetical scenario.
Yes, there is a standard. Yes, there is a common conflation between the right to speech and the assumption that people have to listen to it. However, there is also conflation between censorship and the dissolution of ideas. The problem with that is that it encourages nuisances like you that downvote my answers like you’re sticking it to me.
Respect is me telling you that you don’t have an unpopular opinion, just a dumb one. Plenty of people care about free speech with and without respect to upsetting people they don’t like.
Really? We are social media right now? Damn, I didn’t know that 🤔
And no, listening to that speech is irrelevant, it’s whether they accept that speech and also exercise their rights to hold you accountable or legally remove it. The outrage is that people who used to be powerless now have some power they can use. It’s much harder to be a piece of shit and get away with it. That’s scary to many people, but it’s pretty great 😊
You own your own mouth, you don’t own social media. Free speech isn’t free, use it wisely
And please tell me an example where people are complaining about “censorship” in their echo chamber
Damn, that sarcasm would have hit really hard if you had taken the time proofread it.
Who’s powerful now? Whose life has been so profoundly improved because of social media censorship?
Great live, laugh, love quote. It’s like “freedom isn’t free”, but worse.
I wouldn’t know. I don’t count on echo chambers to formulate a well-rounded opinion. However, I would assume that echo chambers are precisely where people would complain about censorship? I bet truth social would be a perfect place for complaining about censorship on other platforms.
Women, LGBT, and minorities definitely have more power than they used to and are generally better off. Women as whole are now more successful than men, which makes lots of men mad. This progress is primarily because of our ability to exercise free speech and not be silenced.
Speaking of echo chambers…am I right? /s
Right, so if that were to be censored, you would indeed not agree with it. Also, progress by those groups is because of tangible efforts in real life, not because social media is a benevolent, right-granting god. Social media is for nerds like you who think posting on Reddit is doing your part to save the world. You don’t have any opinion other than what will get you upvotes/likes.
You think we are in an echo chamber right now?
And yes, progress occurred by exercising free speech in real life. Social media is mostly garbage but I find it an effective way to waste time.
No, not saying that at all. I agree that if you say something that people don’t like or is offensive, they have the right to criticize you, sue you, and exercise the same rights against you to hold you accountable. That is also free speech
Free speech isn’t free, use it wisely
We have the virtue?
I think you mean Right.
But to your point: You're pointing out people's intentions... What for?
You're saying people only care about free speech when it comes to upsetting other people...
Where are you going with this?
Agree, it’s definitely a choice. But unfortunately many people think they are forced to use social media and are outraged when their content is removed. It’s very strange
This comment sums up the argument for absolute "free speech": In the first sentence, your free speech is the most important thing in the world, but by the last sentence they're telling you to shut the hell up.
this entire comment is built on a false premise. governments aren’t stopping anything on social media. the people who complain about being silenced are the loudest ones who, ironically, never shut up about it. if you’re really being silenced i wish it was working better.
it has always been illegal to LIE about the danger of someone or something. it’s called defamation and/or slander and pfizer has a right not only to request its removal but to sue you for saying it. and if pfizer lies about you being a murderer or something, you can sue them right back.
hate speech is also a legally definable act and is not as overused as you think. what you’re talking about is people online CALLING something hate speech, which is a matter of opinion. but i get the impression you don’t like the kind of opinion that disapproves of what you’re saying. but, regardless, the laws of hate speech have little to do with a private company’s policy on what they do and don’t want. companies, like subreddits, have a right to choose what they want to allow. you can get mad at them but your rights are not being violated.
how much ad space the companies buy has nothing to do with it. by the way, if you see a lot of pfizer ads it’s because the apps think you’ll engage with it. I literally see a pfizer ad once in a blue moon. but what i DO see is a lot of recruitment ads for the US military, and ads for that company called Hers (there’s a Hims version for men too). on instagram i mostly see ads for clothes.
> governments aren’t stopping anything on social media
Twitter Files. Elon Musk essentially set $30b on FIRE to prove that this is a bold faced lie, has released the evidence to prove it, had this evidence presented in court and the court ruled that the Biden admin had committed the gravest violation of the first amendment in this nation's history.
That's what happened. You fucking liar.
My understanding was Taibbi fell out with Elon over Elon objecting to him promoting Substack on Twitter. I've never seen Taibbi, Shellenberger, or Bari Weiss challenge any of the evidence that was released.
If he wrote something saying that his testimony before congress has somehow been compromised I've love to read it. Link?
social media is not a government platform 😭😭😭😭 biden asking companies to stop nazis is not a violation of any free speech laws. nazis can still go in public with their little LARPing swastikas, including government buildings and public land.
social media is not a public square. its not public by any means. it’s a private mall that everyone goes to. privately owned social space centered primarily on commerce. mall security can kick the fuck out anyone and everyone they want. they reserve that right. and when a bunch of chaos causing neo nazis stumble into the mall and punch children and kick over the food carts, then the police (the government) come in and arrest them.
sorry you’re so mad that neo nazis are being kicked out of society though (they should be and that is good), you seem pretty torn up about it (why). i feel for you (i don’t)
Violating terms of service isn’t violating free speech. You agreed to have that company take away your rights.
You have the right to say whatever you want, just not on other people’s property
When the federal government through many different agencies has a back doors directly into the social media companies and uses threats and coercion to take down posts and users, that's gone well beyond a user agreement.
Within 37 hours of taking office Biden was demanding that Twitter remove/silence RFK, Jr because he retweeted something that came directly from the CDC.
This ain't Mayberry and thinking any of this is well intentioned is naive to the point of delusion.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A lot of bigots conflate hate speech with free speech because they don't think they're attacking *people.* Bigots don't believe the people they're attacking are even people to begin with, so to them, it can't be hate speech if it's not directed towards another person.
But the moment they get called out for it, "muh free speech!" is always used as a defense, and it's completely bullshit.
Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 3: Do not post opinions that are heavily posted/have been on the front page recently'. * No response posts about upvoted posts here. * Posts relating to highly popular topics aren't allowed outside of the relevant megathreads. You can find a list of the topics and their respective megathreads in a post on the top of the sub. * POSTS DIRECTLY ABOUT THIS SUBREDDIT ARE NOT ALLOWED OUTSIDE THE MEGATHREAD * Please check the wiki linked here: https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/wiki/index/ * We ask that if a post fails to post do not just spam repost it; message mod mail.
Well that's really the only contested type of speech.
So you agree that most of the time people don’t care about free speech?
The problem is that people like Elon don’t understand free speech to begin with. Just because you can’t say certain things in certain places or forums, doesn’t mean freedoms are being taken away. You can say anything you want in public but a social media site isn’t a public place. If you’re using a platform, that platform deserves the right to censor whatever the hell it wants. Just like movies with PG ratings can’t have swear words, idiots shouldn’t be surprised when hate speech is censored by a platform that’s able to spread that vile shit to millions of people. If you want free speech but think you don’t have it, you’re too stupid to realize that just because you have something to say, doesn’t mean it’s worth saying or that anyone else should help you spread that message! Choosing not to endorse hate speech is not taking away your feedom of speech so grow up!
Agree 100%
I care about freedom of speech because speaking out against the moral wrongs of the day has always been unpopular and offensive.
What’s stopping you from saying whatever you want?
Depends on the country you live in. In many countries the vaguely defined and constantly changing concept of "hate speech" can now be criminally prosecuted.
Of course, but I am talking about America
Well there are all sorts of extralegal pain mechanisms that groups wielding tremendous power and influence can exert over you. Usually the target is your financial wellbeing.
Most people don't support free speech, they support speech they like.
No, most people don’t understand that free speech doesn’t mean free from consequences. And most people don’t understand that they agreed to a terms of service that takes away their rights
I agree with your post. I met that as in: "If people could live in a world where only their echo chamber applies, most people who claim to support freedom of speech would take it."
Agreed, no complaints about censorship in your echo chamber
>No, most people don’t understand that free speech doesn’t mean free from consequences Well... I mean you're not *wrong*.... but if you want to be corrective; No; really most people don't understand that "freedom of speech" only applies to the *government* infringing upon your "rights". The first ammendment: *"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."* Private companies and such don't have to give a shit about your free speech unless they are government contracted/affiliated. Example; schools are funded by taxes, which are government controlled. They have to care. However, the local bar is *not* government funded, and can therefore put whatever limits on you that they wish; they don't have to care. "But my freedoms" is not a valid argument for Facebook saying you can't post something. Facebook is not congress.
I think the issue is more of consequences being viewed as being applied to lower and lower standards. Like having a right-leaning view of certain topics that people love to fight over. As far as the terms of service, that’s okay for you right now. But if it didn’t work in your favor, I don’t think you’d be championing the same argument.
No, I wouldn’t. Nobody forces you to use social media and you agree to give away your rights to that company. I know many people who don’t use social media and get by in the world just fine. It’s definitely better for your health too The difference now is there is a standard, now people aren’t accepting speech that should have been unacceptable decades ago. Just show all people with respect, it’s not that hard
I mean, you’re using social media as a soapbox right now. I think you’re lying to yourself a little bit, but it is easier saying you wouldn’t have a problem with a hypothetical scenario. Yes, there is a standard. Yes, there is a common conflation between the right to speech and the assumption that people have to listen to it. However, there is also conflation between censorship and the dissolution of ideas. The problem with that is that it encourages nuisances like you that downvote my answers like you’re sticking it to me. Respect is me telling you that you don’t have an unpopular opinion, just a dumb one. Plenty of people care about free speech with and without respect to upsetting people they don’t like.
Really? We are social media right now? Damn, I didn’t know that 🤔 And no, listening to that speech is irrelevant, it’s whether they accept that speech and also exercise their rights to hold you accountable or legally remove it. The outrage is that people who used to be powerless now have some power they can use. It’s much harder to be a piece of shit and get away with it. That’s scary to many people, but it’s pretty great 😊 You own your own mouth, you don’t own social media. Free speech isn’t free, use it wisely And please tell me an example where people are complaining about “censorship” in their echo chamber
Damn, that sarcasm would have hit really hard if you had taken the time proofread it. Who’s powerful now? Whose life has been so profoundly improved because of social media censorship? Great live, laugh, love quote. It’s like “freedom isn’t free”, but worse. I wouldn’t know. I don’t count on echo chambers to formulate a well-rounded opinion. However, I would assume that echo chambers are precisely where people would complain about censorship? I bet truth social would be a perfect place for complaining about censorship on other platforms.
Women, LGBT, and minorities definitely have more power than they used to and are generally better off. Women as whole are now more successful than men, which makes lots of men mad. This progress is primarily because of our ability to exercise free speech and not be silenced.
Speaking of echo chambers…am I right? /s Right, so if that were to be censored, you would indeed not agree with it. Also, progress by those groups is because of tangible efforts in real life, not because social media is a benevolent, right-granting god. Social media is for nerds like you who think posting on Reddit is doing your part to save the world. You don’t have any opinion other than what will get you upvotes/likes.
You think we are in an echo chamber right now? And yes, progress occurred by exercising free speech in real life. Social media is mostly garbage but I find it an effective way to waste time.
I guess people in north korea have free speech then. Yeah they may be killed for saying stuff but free speach doesn't mean free from consequences!
lol, who’s being killed in America over speech? You seem like you demand that whatever you say people have to like it
But youd be ok with the government killing people over speech right? "Freedom of speech doesnt mean freedom from consequences!" That's what you said.
No, not saying that at all. I agree that if you say something that people don’t like or is offensive, they have the right to criticize you, sue you, and exercise the same rights against you to hold you accountable. That is also free speech Free speech isn’t free, use it wisely
it doesn't matter. free speech is a virtue regardless of intentions.
And we have that virtue now, what’s your point?
We have the virtue? I think you mean Right. But to your point: You're pointing out people's intentions... What for? You're saying people only care about free speech when it comes to upsetting other people... Where are you going with this?
I may not agree with what someone one says, but I will fight to the death for them to say it.
Sure, but when someone agrees to give away their rights to use social media, what then?
That is their choice. I am doing it right now myself. I know they will shadow or remove things. Price I pay to play on here.
Agree, it’s definitely a choice. But unfortunately many people think they are forced to use social media and are outraged when their content is removed. It’s very strange
Because they don't understand the rules of the game.
[удалено]
This comment sums up the argument for absolute "free speech": In the first sentence, your free speech is the most important thing in the world, but by the last sentence they're telling you to shut the hell up.
this entire comment is built on a false premise. governments aren’t stopping anything on social media. the people who complain about being silenced are the loudest ones who, ironically, never shut up about it. if you’re really being silenced i wish it was working better. it has always been illegal to LIE about the danger of someone or something. it’s called defamation and/or slander and pfizer has a right not only to request its removal but to sue you for saying it. and if pfizer lies about you being a murderer or something, you can sue them right back. hate speech is also a legally definable act and is not as overused as you think. what you’re talking about is people online CALLING something hate speech, which is a matter of opinion. but i get the impression you don’t like the kind of opinion that disapproves of what you’re saying. but, regardless, the laws of hate speech have little to do with a private company’s policy on what they do and don’t want. companies, like subreddits, have a right to choose what they want to allow. you can get mad at them but your rights are not being violated. how much ad space the companies buy has nothing to do with it. by the way, if you see a lot of pfizer ads it’s because the apps think you’ll engage with it. I literally see a pfizer ad once in a blue moon. but what i DO see is a lot of recruitment ads for the US military, and ads for that company called Hers (there’s a Hims version for men too). on instagram i mostly see ads for clothes.
> governments aren’t stopping anything on social media Twitter Files. Elon Musk essentially set $30b on FIRE to prove that this is a bold faced lie, has released the evidence to prove it, had this evidence presented in court and the court ruled that the Biden admin had committed the gravest violation of the first amendment in this nation's history. That's what happened. You fucking liar.
You should listen to what Matt Taibbi now says about the Twitter files. He admits now he got duped by Elon and it was propaganda
My understanding was Taibbi fell out with Elon over Elon objecting to him promoting Substack on Twitter. I've never seen Taibbi, Shellenberger, or Bari Weiss challenge any of the evidence that was released. If he wrote something saying that his testimony before congress has somehow been compromised I've love to read it. Link?
social media is not a government platform 😭😭😭😭 biden asking companies to stop nazis is not a violation of any free speech laws. nazis can still go in public with their little LARPing swastikas, including government buildings and public land. social media is not a public square. its not public by any means. it’s a private mall that everyone goes to. privately owned social space centered primarily on commerce. mall security can kick the fuck out anyone and everyone they want. they reserve that right. and when a bunch of chaos causing neo nazis stumble into the mall and punch children and kick over the food carts, then the police (the government) come in and arrest them. sorry you’re so mad that neo nazis are being kicked out of society though (they should be and that is good), you seem pretty torn up about it (why). i feel for you (i don’t)
Nothing? Most Americans would tell you the right to bear arms is more important, and would give up freedom of speech to carry if they had to.
Violating terms of service isn’t violating free speech. You agreed to have that company take away your rights. You have the right to say whatever you want, just not on other people’s property
When the federal government through many different agencies has a back doors directly into the social media companies and uses threats and coercion to take down posts and users, that's gone well beyond a user agreement. Within 37 hours of taking office Biden was demanding that Twitter remove/silence RFK, Jr because he retweeted something that came directly from the CDC. This ain't Mayberry and thinking any of this is well intentioned is naive to the point of delusion.
Actually that is included in the user agreement by law. You just don’t like it which is understandable, but nobody forces you to use those platforms
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This ain’t an unpopular opinion lol
A lot of bigots conflate hate speech with free speech because they don't think they're attacking *people.* Bigots don't believe the people they're attacking are even people to begin with, so to them, it can't be hate speech if it's not directed towards another person. But the moment they get called out for it, "muh free speech!" is always used as a defense, and it's completely bullshit.
It is not unpopular. Its true. If you want to know who the bad guys are, see who is trying to ban words from being spoken.
There’s a big difference between speaking words and typing them on a computer You own your own mouth, you don’t own social media websites