• Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    213
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The company said this did not represent a reversal of its previous stance, but rather the result of reconsidering how it interprets its existing policies.

    We’re not taking back what we said about how we wouldn’t kick Nazis off the platform… but we’re kicking Nazis off the platform.

    What a fucking laugh. Fuck Substack.

    • swan_prOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I agree, it’s a tiny step in the right direction, but definitely too little too late.

      • pajn@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        68
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not though, like they say themselves it’s only a reconsideration of the existing policies which is to maximize profit, morals be dammed. First they welcomed Nazis because Nazis gave them money and now they don’t because Nazis cause other people to stop giving them money. If Nazis wasn’t bad business nothing would have changed. This whole ordeal showed what kind of people they are.

        • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Plus, they can’t even admit they’re caving to public pressure. Ego-ridden Nazi sympathizers, weird how that keeps happening.

    • DigitalTraveler42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’ll just do something similar to what Musk did on Shitter initially, pretend to kick them off and then quietly let them back on.

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      67
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah this deserves no praise. This falls squarely under “Fuck around, find out” since it wasn’t even weeks ago that they said they wouldn’t remove Nazis from the platform.

      They’re still angling for a way to allow hate speech on their platform, they’re just hiding behind “taking down content that incites violence” as if that in itself isn’t bare fucking minimum expectation to begin with.

  • tiredofsametab@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    its new policy interpretation will not include proactively removing content related to neo-Nazis and far-right extremism. But Substack will continue to remove any material that includes “credible threats of physical harm

    Not even removing nazi publications

    • capital@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Title gives a very wrong impression of what’s happening.

      You can tell most people didn’t read the article.

    • dirthawker0@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      And I wonder how do they define ‘credible’? Are they literally going to research a writer to determine if they’re capable of following through on their threats?

  • cybersandwich@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I know/knew next to nothing about substack 6 months ago.

    Now I only associate them as the other platform that allows Nazis on it.

  • Empricorn@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Am I crazy, or is this Bud Light-levels of corporate idiocy!?

    First they piss off non-Nazis by saying they won’t remove Nazi-speech. Then they cave to the backlash and remove Nazi speech, pissing off all the Nazis (who they obviously wanted to create a “safe space” for). But everyone else won’t be coming back because of the obvious, mask-off intent…

    Even if they didn’t support Nazi publications, it would be hard to stay loyal to such an incompetent company…

    • Volkditty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      At least they’re trying to backtrack and weasal up to the sane side instead of just doubling down and saying, “Fuck it, yeah, we’re Nazis now.”

  • Tiger Jerusalem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    “We’re not backtracking, we’re just doing a 180° turn from our previous course”. Fucking clowns, probably the Nazi money wasn’t enough to compensate the loss of subscribers.

  • mutant_zz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe I don’t understand Substack that well, but it seems like its market share would be extremely vulnerable. It’s just a way to provide a newsletter (also published on the web) and accept subscriptions (and presumably they take a cut). It’s really easy for someone to set this up themselves even with minimal tech skills. If they already have a following on Substack, they just tell their subscribers to move, and potentially could even import the subscriber list to a new platform. It’s not like social media where there’s a lot of boosting or whatever from others on the platform, so the switching costs are high.

    So unless I’m missing something, I hope people who don’t want Nazis around just move somewhere else. Because from the sounds of this article, they’re not really doing much about the Nazis.

    • gian @lemmy.grys.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Since they take a cut even on the nazis lists, they are going to take a hit in any case so they simply choose the smaller one. As a company is the logical pragmatic approach to use.