Although the platform has explicit guidelines banning content that incites violence, a November article in The Atlantic pointed out at least 16 different newsletters with Nazi symbols, as well as many more supporting far-right extremism, leading to calls for change from many Substack authors and a refusal from leadership.
I vehemently disagree. It’s a terrible affirmation of their indifference to the harms that may come about as a direct result of content hosted on their platform.
Honestly, this is as close to inaction as they can get away with. So, unless the bare minimum is good enough for you, I strongly urge you to reconsider your position.
I mean, Substack lit all the benefit of the doubt I had for them on fire with their previous response.
This new action doesn’t restore that, but all things being equal, I do want nazi shitheads to be de-platformed and have their funding cut off.
I think one can both acknowledge that they finally did a move in the correct direction and still think that they suck overall
They didn’t, though. This is a PR move. They banned 5 people, none of whom had a substantial following. The popular Nazis remain. As I said above, they did the absolute bare minimum.
I agree with you; I think it is indeed the absolute bare minimum they had to do but I also agree with xc2215x that it’s a good move. They moved from -100 to -99 on my shithead-o-meter scale
Fair enough. Pretty sure I can agree with that!