Yes, they are, and that's what we're trying to make clear. There is no place for Nazi propaganda anywhere in America, and especially not at a website where writers gather, hoping to make the world a better place.
But who decides what is "hate speech"? That's part of the problem. I could very credibly argue that fringe left views are also "hate speech," but I don't think we should be banning those either, even if I think the ideas are bad for society. I don't think you (or I) have a right not to feel "distressed." If there's content you don't want to see, don't read it -- or block the writers if you do happen to encounter them. Engaging in the world means you will sometimes feel uncomfortable, but if no one is harassing or threatening you in a personal, directed way, what of it? As for the point about "Substack makes money..." well, it's nearly impossible to go through life vetting every last vendor for the ideological cleanness you seem to want. Before you go to a restaurant or buy a shirt on Etsy or eBay or hire a lawn care company, do you (and do you even have the means of) investigating the people who will make money and is it worth your time to do so? It would be impossible/exhausting, and politely, I guess I would just say get over it.
I wonder if "Substack" in this case means "the people who own and run the platform" or "the loudest or most influential voices who are able to manipulate the people who own and run the platform." And in that way the answer becomes less simple, doesn't it? And that is why I think it's best just to let everyone have their space to say what they want and then individual users can choose how and what they engage with.
I don’t get your point. The people who own and run the platform make the decisions. It doesn't matter who influences them, if anyone. They're aiding and encouraging haters who get off on threatening harm. Bottom line.
When a hostage says or does something, do you believe it is really the hostage's preference -- or that of the hostage taker? And I think we have all seen organizations taken hostage. Surely you remember the haywire summer of 2020. Or the last decade in elite higher education.
We'll just have to disagree on this. Happy stifling.
They must decide on their own, just as we did. It should be as clear as it is to us. They’re not hard to detect. They don’t hide it, they broadcast it.
I was wondering when this would happen. Thanks for doing it.
I know that several of my fellow leftist journalists have long refused to engage with Substack because of the upfront financial incentives offered to right-wing personalities a couple of years ago.
I wonder how Substack deals with countries with decency laws in place. Swastikas are illegal in Germany, for instance. Geoblocked?
Dec 14, 2023·edited Dec 14, 2023Liked by Ramona Grigg
The question of decency laws is really interesting. I wonder if there is an exception based on the content not being stored on servers in that country (which is how a lot of privacy laws were ignored/flouted a few years before GDPR as I understand it). Or if they're just a small enough presence in Germany that they haven't hit that wall yet.
I've been having a similar discussion over email about this very issue, with people on both sides of the fence about it. I wish this platform were being used to have an honest discussion about the paths forward, bringing both sides together, but right now it seems to be happening in private among people who have no opportunity to enact the changes themselves. Maybe these letters are leading to that discussion. I can hope that Substack's founders take the ball and show the leadership required. They may not be high hopes, but there is still hope.
I appreciate you refusing to let the discussion be silenced.
Thank you for correcting me. I haven’t waded into the space in a long time and then it was tangential as we weren’t building social media but HPC systems. Obviously different concerns.
I appreciate the clarification. It’s good to know the dynamics.
That’s a really interesting point. What’s Germany’s position? Is it banned period? Or is it prohibited from being monetised? I’m aware of exactly the criticism that I could field from even asking (“It shouldn’t matter...”) But I’m trying to understand and have awareness of the full scope of the situation. Even if we disagree with their viewpoint, (and I’m most certainly anti-hate), I’d still like to have an understanding of the underlying dynamics of the problem.
I do think this letter in particular (I can't speak for the other and some of the names on the signers list make me extremely nervous) is meant to start a necessary dialogue. At the very least, it should stir the founders up enough to finally answer the damn questions.
Hamish practically drooled over having Richard Hamanian here (sp?) and he needs to answer for that. It's outrageous.
Lack of action on the part of the founders is evidence of acquiescence. History has shown us what happens when we turn a blind eye to hate. Now is the time for action.
What's most disturbing is there is some obvious promoting of the worst of the propagandists here by at least one of the founders, and he has yet to address it.
If he won't answer for his actions, it tells us he intends for it to go on. That's why this letter and any other form of protest is so important.
Excellent, Ramona. Re-stacked and I am happy to re-publish, too. You have my utmost respect and gratitude for beginning this action. I trust that the response will be overwhelmingly positive.
Several Nazis and white supremacists including Richard Spencer not only have paid subscriptions turned on but have received Substack “Bestseller” badges, indicating that they are making at a minimum thousands of dollars a year.
Damn, and I chose folk and protest music for a career!
Thank you for this, Ramona. I absolutely stand with you on this. This is NOT a matter of free speech. Nazi’s are peddlers of hate speech and are seeking followers among those who may teetering in direction already. I am actually incensed to think that Substack is supporting the funding of the machine by allowing those Nazis who profit from paid subscribers on this platform to not only build up their coffers, but as you pointed out, those funds from followers of Nazi propagandists are helping to make Substack founders wealthier. The questions you posed demand answers as far as I am concerned. Why are they platforming and monetizing Nazis???
I have a very small following, so if I left this platform, it would of no consequence to no one except me and nearly 200 followers who seem to enjoy my writing, and some even support my endeavors financially. For that I am both amazed and grateful. My conscience however would not allow me to remain here if this platform continues to allow Nazis to build email lists here (lists they will be able to keep by the way) and benefit financially to build power in this country, I will leave Substack.
There is no place in the United States of America where hate speech that espouses Nazi ideas and beliefs under swastika avatars, or without the avatars, should be allowed. A platform like Substack should be the first place to make this clear. They are being extremely hypocritical if they ban sex worker, spam sites, and allow purveyors of white nationalism.
I've had a good experience on Substack so far, and love that I can subscribe to the opinions and 'vibes' that resonate with mine..... and don't have to see the hate and vitriol that doesn't come into my feed.... My subscriber numbers are very low, but I appreciate the space to lay my own thoughts and writings.
But that said - it is concerning..... I think the spirit, goals and underlying philosophy of the platform need to be closely looked at, perhaps re-written, and purged accordingly.... cos, for SURE, it doesn't depend on context when a hate group calls for obliteration of certain peoples
I signed the opposite letter, because I'd prefer that Substack choose to adopt standards of free speech consistent with the First Amendment and its narrow exceptions.
I understand your different point of view.
But what's by far most important to me is that whatever Substack decides to do, I hope that writers disappointed with the decision won't make their disappointment a reason to leave.
I know if Substack decides to moderate robustly, against my preferences, that would not come close to a reason for me to consider leaving this wonderful place. Not for a nanosecond.
That doesn't mean it's not there.
As someone new to Substack, I find this very distressing. Free speech and hate speech are two very different things.
Yes, they are, and that's what we're trying to make clear. There is no place for Nazi propaganda anywhere in America, and especially not at a website where writers gather, hoping to make the world a better place.
It's not just America, Ramona. It's global.
But who decides what is "hate speech"? That's part of the problem. I could very credibly argue that fringe left views are also "hate speech," but I don't think we should be banning those either, even if I think the ideas are bad for society. I don't think you (or I) have a right not to feel "distressed." If there's content you don't want to see, don't read it -- or block the writers if you do happen to encounter them. Engaging in the world means you will sometimes feel uncomfortable, but if no one is harassing or threatening you in a personal, directed way, what of it? As for the point about "Substack makes money..." well, it's nearly impossible to go through life vetting every last vendor for the ideological cleanness you seem to want. Before you go to a restaurant or buy a shirt on Etsy or eBay or hire a lawn care company, do you (and do you even have the means of) investigating the people who will make money and is it worth your time to do so? It would be impossible/exhausting, and politely, I guess I would just say get over it.
Who decides? Simple answer: Substack does.
I wonder if "Substack" in this case means "the people who own and run the platform" or "the loudest or most influential voices who are able to manipulate the people who own and run the platform." And in that way the answer becomes less simple, doesn't it? And that is why I think it's best just to let everyone have their space to say what they want and then individual users can choose how and what they engage with.
I don’t get your point. The people who own and run the platform make the decisions. It doesn't matter who influences them, if anyone. They're aiding and encouraging haters who get off on threatening harm. Bottom line.
When a hostage says or does something, do you believe it is really the hostage's preference -- or that of the hostage taker? And I think we have all seen organizations taken hostage. Surely you remember the haywire summer of 2020. Or the last decade in elite higher education.
We'll just have to disagree on this. Happy stifling.
How does Substack decide what constitutes hate speech or Nazi propaganda?
They must decide on their own, just as we did. It should be as clear as it is to us. They’re not hard to detect. They don’t hide it, they broadcast it.
I was wondering when this would happen. Thanks for doing it.
I know that several of my fellow leftist journalists have long refused to engage with Substack because of the upfront financial incentives offered to right-wing personalities a couple of years ago.
I wonder how Substack deals with countries with decency laws in place. Swastikas are illegal in Germany, for instance. Geoblocked?
I hate that this is hurting Substack's reputation and the founders are still being this stubborn about it. They have to know that.
And your last question is a good one. How DO they bypass those decency laws?
Thanks for your thoughts.
The question of decency laws is really interesting. I wonder if there is an exception based on the content not being stored on servers in that country (which is how a lot of privacy laws were ignored/flouted a few years before GDPR as I understand it). Or if they're just a small enough presence in Germany that they haven't hit that wall yet.
I've been having a similar discussion over email about this very issue, with people on both sides of the fence about it. I wish this platform were being used to have an honest discussion about the paths forward, bringing both sides together, but right now it seems to be happening in private among people who have no opportunity to enact the changes themselves. Maybe these letters are leading to that discussion. I can hope that Substack's founders take the ball and show the leadership required. They may not be high hopes, but there is still hope.
I appreciate you refusing to let the discussion be silenced.
Thank you for correcting me. I haven’t waded into the space in a long time and then it was tangential as we weren’t building social media but HPC systems. Obviously different concerns.
I appreciate the clarification. It’s good to know the dynamics.
Germany is my 3rd biggest readership after US and UK, so they should think fast imo
Great point! I wonder if they've had to address this yet?
That’s a really interesting point. What’s Germany’s position? Is it banned period? Or is it prohibited from being monetised? I’m aware of exactly the criticism that I could field from even asking (“It shouldn’t matter...”) But I’m trying to understand and have awareness of the full scope of the situation. Even if we disagree with their viewpoint, (and I’m most certainly anti-hate), I’d still like to have an understanding of the underlying dynamics of the problem.
I do think this letter in particular (I can't speak for the other and some of the names on the signers list make me extremely nervous) is meant to start a necessary dialogue. At the very least, it should stir the founders up enough to finally answer the damn questions.
Hamish practically drooled over having Richard Hamanian here (sp?) and he needs to answer for that. It's outrageous.
Yes, they've never answered for that, either. They need to know we're still waiting for answers.
Lack of action on the part of the founders is evidence of acquiescence. History has shown us what happens when we turn a blind eye to hate. Now is the time for action.
What's most disturbing is there is some obvious promoting of the worst of the propagandists here by at least one of the founders, and he has yet to address it.
If he won't answer for his actions, it tells us he intends for it to go on. That's why this letter and any other form of protest is so important.
Thanks for this. I've posted it on my substack and am already getting comments.
Excellent, Ramona. Re-stacked and I am happy to re-publish, too. You have my utmost respect and gratitude for beginning this action. I trust that the response will be overwhelmingly positive.
Several Nazis and white supremacists including Richard Spencer not only have paid subscriptions turned on but have received Substack “Bestseller” badges, indicating that they are making at a minimum thousands of dollars a year.
Damn, and I chose folk and protest music for a career!
Thanks.
Thx for sending. While there are buttons to block and report I don’t know if Substack has yet to kick anyone off the platform.
Thank you for this, Ramona. I absolutely stand with you on this. This is NOT a matter of free speech. Nazi’s are peddlers of hate speech and are seeking followers among those who may teetering in direction already. I am actually incensed to think that Substack is supporting the funding of the machine by allowing those Nazis who profit from paid subscribers on this platform to not only build up their coffers, but as you pointed out, those funds from followers of Nazi propagandists are helping to make Substack founders wealthier. The questions you posed demand answers as far as I am concerned. Why are they platforming and monetizing Nazis???
I have a very small following, so if I left this platform, it would of no consequence to no one except me and nearly 200 followers who seem to enjoy my writing, and some even support my endeavors financially. For that I am both amazed and grateful. My conscience however would not allow me to remain here if this platform continues to allow Nazis to build email lists here (lists they will be able to keep by the way) and benefit financially to build power in this country, I will leave Substack.
There is no place in the United States of America where hate speech that espouses Nazi ideas and beliefs under swastika avatars, or without the avatars, should be allowed. A platform like Substack should be the first place to make this clear. They are being extremely hypocritical if they ban sex worker, spam sites, and allow purveyors of white nationalism.
Cross-posted. No room for Nazis in this world.
I was not aware of this situation, thank you for enlightening us.
I've had a good experience on Substack so far, and love that I can subscribe to the opinions and 'vibes' that resonate with mine..... and don't have to see the hate and vitriol that doesn't come into my feed.... My subscriber numbers are very low, but I appreciate the space to lay my own thoughts and writings.
But that said - it is concerning..... I think the spirit, goals and underlying philosophy of the platform need to be closely looked at, perhaps re-written, and purged accordingly.... cos, for SURE, it doesn't depend on context when a hate group calls for obliteration of certain peoples
Goodness. I'm shocked.
Especially as I found my tribe on Substack. Would I walk away? Yes. I despise rightwing attitudes and racism.
Thanks for this, Ramona. I had no idea this was happening. I hope Substack decides to do the right thing and remove these newsletters.
I’ve stacked to my site. I would like to be a signatory.
Hi Ramona,
I signed the opposite letter, because I'd prefer that Substack choose to adopt standards of free speech consistent with the First Amendment and its narrow exceptions.
I understand your different point of view.
But what's by far most important to me is that whatever Substack decides to do, I hope that writers disappointed with the decision won't make their disappointment a reason to leave.
I know if Substack decides to moderate robustly, against my preferences, that would not come close to a reason for me to consider leaving this wonderful place. Not for a nanosecond.
I ask everyone for perspective.
Best,
David
I respect your decision, Maureen.