Originally, a literal platform, such as let’s say a box that soap was shipped in, that a speaker used to elevate herself a little, in a public area, for the purpose of making her views and opinions heard.
In later extensions of the metaphor, a printing press, or an open mic at a radio station a century ago, or even god help us your facebook page … platforms.
I want to digress to yesterday’s concept of auditing to show you two more examples.
Luverne Minnesota – First Amendment Audit – Amagansett Press
Woman Goes Irate Over Questionable Traffic Ticket
The first case is a serious attempt at Auditing as we defined it. The second is just an analysis of bodycam footage from a fairly routine traffic stop. What they have in common is that the cops come off looking a lot better than the rights-holding citizens they encounter, in my opinion.
What they both have in common with the concept of a platform is that the First Amendment is at issue across the board.
The 1st is of course the amendment that deals with freedom of speech, and it attempts to prevent government censorship. Censorship is still a major issue, but now there’s a modern extension of it which threatens to become even more problematic for citizens average and not. This is de-platforming.
Donald Trump was de-platformed from Twitter.
Most reasonable people probably cheered a little in their hearts, myself included, even if (like me) they don’t use Twitter.
That cheering was natural, and it was wrong, because de-platforming violates the spirit of the First Amendment, and it’s proving in real time to not be limited to just crazy orange presidents.
Deplatforming Dissent — Independent Media Targeted
This video is JD interviewing two fellow content creators who have been de-platformed to a greater or lesser extent, without clearly articulated reasons why, by YouTube.
I believe it’ll only be a matter of time before the same thing happens to Dore, and perhaps to even less controversial outlets like Audit the Audit.
Twenty years ago, as the owner of a public Internet platform, I would have been standing up for the right of private businesses to boot or ban anyone they liked. I happened to be an extremely tolerant host, but that’s not the point. It was, in the end, my business and my call.
The difference is that I was running a platform whose participants numbered in the hundreds, and there were in fact several other sites with different approaches to free speech running the exact same piece of software I had installed. If people didn’t like my hosting style, they could go somewhere similar that was more to their liking.
But Twitter, Facebook, and especially YouTube are effectively monopolies, and they either need to be broken up, as monopolies should be, or treated as common carriers and public utilities.
The water company can’t shut off your water because they don’t like you posting about Q-anon.
The phone company can’t decide that your phone is cut off because they think your conversations are seditious.
YouTube should not be able to de-monetize you because they don’t like your politics, or even if they think you’re a liar. But not only are they able. They are willing. They are beginning to pull the trigger right and left.
The underlying problem, as often happens, revolves around money. As a monopoly, YouTube can easily afford to choke out small content creators by pinching the hose of their cash flow.
These creators are well-aware that their livelihoods exist at the whim of a faceless and notoriously capricious platform owner, and there are many attempts underway to circumvent the monopoly by posting stuff at places like Rokfin and Vimeo and Lbry and Twitch. But it’s a tough row to hoe, because all the monetized eyeballs, yours and mine, are stuck at YouTube, and few people are even aware that alternatives exist.
It’s a bitterly complicated problem that is only going to get worse with a neo-liberal administration in the White House.
UPDATE: It’s not just a couple of random people. This was a mass demonetization.
Leftists Face Unprecedented Censorship
Moreover, YouTube offered no specifics on what videos, topics, or imagery led to their shitty decision. Creator after creator posted the same boilerplate email that just said it was happening due to unspecified “Harmful Content”. Apparently the temporary refuge of choice is turning out to be Rokfin, which also means I will likely shift my viewing habits toward that site, and alter links accordingly. (Or maybe not. Rokfin requires signing up and signing in to watch literally anything. I guess a lot will depend on whether they’re okay with an obviously pseudonymous user.)