Because censorship is wrong.
May. 30th, 2007 07:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
riot_nrrrdI realize that it's been a day since the whole controversy erupted, which means that, in LJ-land, everything to be said about it has already been said, but I feel the need to weigh in on the mass LJ deletion that has gone down in the past day.
For those of you not in the know: recently, a group calling itself Warriors for Innocence-- a self-styled child-abuse-and-incest vigilante group which a) does not appear to have any real credentials as an anti-abuse-and-incest activist group, b) appears to be little more than a few disgruntled individuals with a blog and a chip on their shoulder, c) may have links to Dominionist groups and even a right-wing militia, has threatened LiveJournal with legal action if it does not delete a number of journals that, it claims, promote incest and child abuse.
As a result, some 500 journals, including both communities and personal journals, have been deleted from LiveJournal. While some of them are, in fact, communities glorifying incest and child abuse, the vast majority of them are fanfiction communities with adult content, personal journals of fanfic writers, journals by and for rape and incest survivors, roleplay and discussion journals concerning consensual ageplay, and, in one case, a community journal dedicated to discussing the novel Lolita. (You can get a more complete list of deleted journals here.) Many, if not most, of these journals have been deleted not for their actual content, but for the content of their interests lists-- journals containing "rape" and "incest" in their interests lists, as well as other, more oblique interests (I have heard of one journal being suspended for having "pretty boys" on its interest list.) Most journals were deleted without warning, and without hope of appeal.
The powers-that-be at Six Apart (the company who owns LiveJournal) claim that the mass deletion of journal is meant to decrease their liability, by ridding LJ of journals that "promote illegal activity." Furthermore, Barak Berkowitz, chairman of Six Apart, asserts that, even if many of said journals did not actively promote real-life sexual abuse, they will stay deleted because "Our decision here was not based on pure legal issues. It was based on what community we want to build and what we think is appropriate within that community and what's not." In other words, LiveJournal is not what its users want to make of it, but what Six Apart wants to make of it, and they reserve the right to censor and delete any journal which they feel is counter to the image they want for LJ. Six Apart has since conceded that they did delete some journals in error, but that most of said journals will remain deleted, with probably little more than a dozen journals getting reinstated.
I'm sure I need not mention to all of you that this is censorship of the worst sort.
I have been a loyal member of LJ for some seven years now, and I have stuck with this site through all sorts of controversy. One such controversy keeps cropping up in my head in light of this rash of deletions. I remember, a few years ago, a huge controversy erupted regarding the proliferation of pro-eating disorder communities on LiveJournal. At the time, the powers-that-be on LJ argued that pro-anorexia and -bulimia communities were protected by free speech, and would thus be allowed to stay. (I do not remember if Six Apart was in charge at the time, but simply insert "pro ana" in the interests search at the top of your page, and you will see that this policy persists: pro-eating disorder communities are everywhere on LiveJournal.) I find it absolutely appalling that journals and communities that actively promote and encourage destructive behavior in their members are allowed to not only remain, but proliferate, on LiveJournal, while surivors' journals, and journals that explore social and sexual taboos through FICTION, are being deleted without warning or appeal.
I encourage you all to either e-mail privacy@livejournal.com, or preferably, to call Six Apart protesting this policy. (I e-mailed Six Apart today, and plan to call tomorrow.) In the meantime, I want all of your insights on the merits of free blog services you've subscribed to, and am thinking of setting up a GreatestJournal. I fear that, if this doesn't clear up, then LiveJournal and I have gone as far as we can go together.
EDIT: Apparently, said censorship not only implies an uneven application of the LJ Terms of Service, but is in direct contradiction with Six Apart's policy on the subject four months ago. The hypocrisy, it hurts the brain.
Also, while we're at it: A not entirely accurate, but certainly more comprehensive, list of victims of the LJ purge.
For those of you not in the know: recently, a group calling itself Warriors for Innocence-- a self-styled child-abuse-and-incest vigilante group which a) does not appear to have any real credentials as an anti-abuse-and-incest activist group, b) appears to be little more than a few disgruntled individuals with a blog and a chip on their shoulder, c) may have links to Dominionist groups and even a right-wing militia, has threatened LiveJournal with legal action if it does not delete a number of journals that, it claims, promote incest and child abuse.
As a result, some 500 journals, including both communities and personal journals, have been deleted from LiveJournal. While some of them are, in fact, communities glorifying incest and child abuse, the vast majority of them are fanfiction communities with adult content, personal journals of fanfic writers, journals by and for rape and incest survivors, roleplay and discussion journals concerning consensual ageplay, and, in one case, a community journal dedicated to discussing the novel Lolita. (You can get a more complete list of deleted journals here.) Many, if not most, of these journals have been deleted not for their actual content, but for the content of their interests lists-- journals containing "rape" and "incest" in their interests lists, as well as other, more oblique interests (I have heard of one journal being suspended for having "pretty boys" on its interest list.) Most journals were deleted without warning, and without hope of appeal.
The powers-that-be at Six Apart (the company who owns LiveJournal) claim that the mass deletion of journal is meant to decrease their liability, by ridding LJ of journals that "promote illegal activity." Furthermore, Barak Berkowitz, chairman of Six Apart, asserts that, even if many of said journals did not actively promote real-life sexual abuse, they will stay deleted because "Our decision here was not based on pure legal issues. It was based on what community we want to build and what we think is appropriate within that community and what's not." In other words, LiveJournal is not what its users want to make of it, but what Six Apart wants to make of it, and they reserve the right to censor and delete any journal which they feel is counter to the image they want for LJ. Six Apart has since conceded that they did delete some journals in error, but that most of said journals will remain deleted, with probably little more than a dozen journals getting reinstated.
I'm sure I need not mention to all of you that this is censorship of the worst sort.
I have been a loyal member of LJ for some seven years now, and I have stuck with this site through all sorts of controversy. One such controversy keeps cropping up in my head in light of this rash of deletions. I remember, a few years ago, a huge controversy erupted regarding the proliferation of pro-eating disorder communities on LiveJournal. At the time, the powers-that-be on LJ argued that pro-anorexia and -bulimia communities were protected by free speech, and would thus be allowed to stay. (I do not remember if Six Apart was in charge at the time, but simply insert "pro ana" in the interests search at the top of your page, and you will see that this policy persists: pro-eating disorder communities are everywhere on LiveJournal.) I find it absolutely appalling that journals and communities that actively promote and encourage destructive behavior in their members are allowed to not only remain, but proliferate, on LiveJournal, while surivors' journals, and journals that explore social and sexual taboos through FICTION, are being deleted without warning or appeal.
I encourage you all to either e-mail privacy@livejournal.com, or preferably, to call Six Apart protesting this policy. (I e-mailed Six Apart today, and plan to call tomorrow.) In the meantime, I want all of your insights on the merits of free blog services you've subscribed to, and am thinking of setting up a GreatestJournal. I fear that, if this doesn't clear up, then LiveJournal and I have gone as far as we can go together.
EDIT: Apparently, said censorship not only implies an uneven application of the LJ Terms of Service, but is in direct contradiction with Six Apart's policy on the subject four months ago. The hypocrisy, it hurts the brain.
Also, while we're at it: A not entirely accurate, but certainly more comprehensive, list of victims of the LJ purge.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: I want to have my cake and eat it too!
Date: 2007-05-31 07:14 am (UTC)This is a community that requires *my* CONTENT and paid account money to make it great. as such, i consider myself a minor shareholder in the livejournal brand. And as such, they should be accountable to me.
If people didn't break any laws or violate TOS, they shouldn't have been deleted or suspended. In doing so, livejournal/six apart violated community standards (i'll get back to that) and certainly at the very least should have to refund people's money (pro-rated of course) if these deleted folks had paid accounts. I'd also like to see them get to access their journals and their content again to be able to save it somewhere else.
Community standards - livejournal has always banked on its community standards of noncensorship and free speech to get satisfied users and attract more customers/content adders. it has relied on internet reputation and word-of-mouth advertising. if things have changed here, then i think everyone who uses this service has a right, if not a duty, to inform others.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-31 07:21 am (UTC)Re: I want to have my cake and eat it too!
Date: 2007-05-31 03:18 pm (UTC)LJ has obviously decided that SOME people's content don't make it all that great. That's THEIR right, because it's THEIR site - NOT yours. They are merely PERMITTING you to be here.
"as such, i consider myself a minor shareholder in the livejournal brand. And as such, they should be accountable to me."
rofl. When was the last time you attended a stockholders meeting? You own squat when it comes to LJ. You are here because they ALLOW you to be here. They are, in no way whatsoever, accountable to you. You are permitted to post within their website at THEIR consent and discretion - not your own.
"If people didn't break any laws or violate TOS, they shouldn't have been deleted or suspended."
YOU don't get to determine LJ's terms of service or content policy. THEY get to - and you can either get on board with it, or go find somewhere else to host your journal.
"I'd also like to see them get to access their journals and their content again to be able to save it somewhere else."
What makes you think you have any right to it? Because you wrote it? Newsflash: when you submitted it to LiveJournal, you gave it up to them. Them deleting it is no different than as if they'd had a server crash and it all got lost. You risked losing your work when you decided to host it somewhere other than your own servers. If your work was that important to you, you'd keep backup copies.
"Community standards - livejournal has always banked on its community standards of noncensorship and free speech to get satisfied users and attract more customers/content adders."
LJ obviously cares more about not being associated with child abusers than they do the oh-so-precious "community standards" that YOU'RE demanding THEY adopt. Their "standards" are THEIRS to decide, because THEY OWN this so-called "community". If you don't like the way LiveJournal runs their community, Myspace and Geocities are just a click away.
"if things have changed here, then i think everyone who uses this service has a right, if not a duty, to inform others."
It's one thing to inform others when a group unjustly being oppressed and deprived. It's a whole other thing to whine and complain when YOU'RE the one trying to dictate what you should be allowed to say on someone else's website.
Re: I want to have my cake and eat it too!
Date: 2007-05-31 03:40 pm (UTC)I only did the all caps for emphasis thing like 3 times.
You originally stated that you were posting anonymously since you weren't an LJ user. If that's actually true, you probably don't understand the culture here. The culture that I have been taking part in for at least 5 years. If you can't understand how this "act stupidly first, talk to your members later" slash and burn policy of six apart's isn't offensive (especially the part where they felt they should be more loyal to a shadowy interest group than their own members)--you aren't going to get it. so let's stop wasting time.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-31 03:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-31 05:06 pm (UTC)http://www.okcupid.com/profile?u=atomicturtle
I'm talking about this subject over in my journal now too - and you're all welcome to come comment on it if you'd like.
no subject
Date: 2007-05-31 05:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-05-31 05:34 pm (UTC)PS. Sorry star, for distracting the discussion with this side-issue.
no subject
Date: 2007-06-01 03:17 am (UTC)(And I don't mind the main discussion, either. I obviously don't agree with you, but as the debate has calmed down and gotten less inflammatory, I haven't minded hosting it.)
Question: where did you find my journal?
no subject
Date: 2007-06-01 12:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-06-06 01:28 am (UTC)Re: I want to have my cake and eat it too!
Date: 2007-05-31 05:03 pm (UTC)That's a fair criticism - but it doesn't change the point. Regardless of how long you've been here or what you find offensive, keep in mind that LiveJournal has every right to decide for themselves what kind of content they want on their servers, and what kind of content gets associated with their site. If I ran LiveJournal, I'd totally support a persons right to believe in all kinds of heinous stuff - child abuse, racism, rape, whatever - but just because I respect their right to believe what they want DOESN'T mean I have to give them a place to express those beliefs. You are not entitled to LiveJournal on your terms. You are permitted to use LiveJournal on THEIRS.
"If you can't understand how this "act stupidly first, talk to your members later" slash and burn policy of six apart's isn't offensive"
Who are you to dictate how they should act? If you don't like how LJ does business, take your business elsewhere. It's that simple.
Re: I want to have my cake and eat it too!
Date: 2007-05-31 05:12 pm (UTC)I think a little more transparency on this issue from livejournal would have been in good faith and community-supportive. I know they don't *have* to, but it would gone a long way to calm the disgruntled.
Re: I want to have my cake and eat it too!
Date: 2007-05-31 05:20 pm (UTC)Of course! I'm not saying we shouldn't be having this discussion (in fact, I'm quite enjoying it. Been awhile since I've had a good censorship debate. :), or that LiveJournal folks don't have a right to be upset. I'm merely saying that if this is how LJ wants to run their site, that's their exclusive right.
"I know they don't *have* to, but it would gone a long way to calm the disgruntled."
Most likely - but it doesn't really change anything as far as the merits of this dicussion are concerned. LJ could unilaterally and without warning decide to ban all black people. It'd make them total assholes, and a lot of people would be very justified in being very pissed - but even something as heinous as that wouldn't change the fact that LiveJournal can do whatever it wants, whenever it wants with their website.
.
Date: 2007-05-31 05:28 pm (UTC)i feel bad that
no subject
Date: 2007-06-06 01:35 am (UTC)