Chilling Effects

[octothorpe]

Chilling Effect:

A chilling effect is a situation where speech or conduct is suppressed or limited by fear of penalization at the hands of an individual or group. For example, the threat of a costly and lengthy lawsuit might prompt self-censorship and have a chilling effect on free speech.

Livejournal has instituted a new method for not only blog owners, but any registered user to flag a blog as "inappropriate" for various age groups. In order to view a flagged blog, a registered user must include their date-of-birth (DOB) in their profile, and explicitly click a button that states they're aware that the content has been deemed "inappropriate" for an age group. The blog owner has no recourse, and can't un-flag their own content that others have flagged. It's effectively a scarlet letter.

This is profoundly distressing. If you don't understand this, reply, and I'll explain it to you in excruciating detail. I assume my readership is actually smart enough to understand the far-reaching consequences of this.

A Modest Proposal
We're all registered users. Create a new (free) account. Now find all posts from all 6Apart (owns Livejournal) and LJ administrators, all blogs that have never contained anything more than puppies and flowers, all posts from 14 year old girls and boys, and flag them as "inappropriate content for under 18s". Do this for every post they have. This is a protest for free speech.

For the record, I'd have no problem with a mechanism for allowing (not forcing) people to flag *their own* content, but to allow any random user with a grudge to flag your posts is poorly thought out at best, and otherwise downright insidious.

Edit Added thornyc's idea of creating another LJ alt before flagging everything under the sun.

Comments

[tinman11201.livejournal.com]

censorship of any kind is always distressing and upsetting to me.

[sunsmogseahorse.livejournal.com]

It's such a fig leaf to cover their asses. A transparent fig leaf at that.

[theoctothorpe.livejournal.com]

But that's just it... they *already* have something to cover their arses. Their TOS says what can/can't "go" as far as content, and they've always had an Abuse Ticket system. This however, crosses the line to community-based censorship.

[sunsmogseahorse.livejournal.com]

Check out this post from my friend John. Someone flagged it.

http://tlkmngstyrslvs.livejournal.com/32419.html

[theoctothorpe.livejournal.com]

I can't access it, as it's a locked post.

[sunsmogseahorse.livejournal.com]

Oh, sorry. Didn't see that. It's completely innocuous. There's a photo from 30Rock of a guy with a cigar in his mouth. It's obviously flagged by some random nut.

[mrdreamjeans.livejournal.com]

I couldn't read your friend's post because my user info doesn't explicitly include my birth year. So, now I have to make a choice ... Do I comply, so that I can read adult material or resist because it's no one's business how much over 50 I am? I don't like either option. It appears that LJ has made a major tactical error ... We should be burning up the phones and their feedback sections. This is the only online site I frequent, but I'll give it up if they don't rescind their policy.

[theoctothorpe.livejournal.com]

This is interesting indeed, as an article on lj_biz states that items flagged by people go into a review queue, and only posts that have "several" people flagging the content will actually get flagged. Oh, and it also said that locked posts (ie friends only) can't be flagged.

Now, you're a bright lad (and a handsome one, but I don't want to get too distracted from my point), what's wrong with this picture?

Totally. Fucking. Broken.

[greatbearmd.livejournal.com]

I went into my settings and set my journal to adult concepts. Did not see any change. However, to an unregistered user, every single post was reduced to a link that said to the effect that this post is not suitable for minors. In other words, it reduced my entire journal to a series of censor links. That was by my own decision, and I reversed it. If some user decided what I write is not to their liking, I have no choice. You can rest assured the xtian sheep are already flocking to go around flagging gay blogs like mine.

When I get the chance, I am going to head out across every journal I can find that deals with xtian concepts and flag it as inappropriate. Same with sixapart staff, right wingers, etc, in short, every single group I can muster that advocates censorship.

I'm now sorry I became a permanent member, since more now than ever, I feel I want nothing more to do with this journal.

[theoctothorpe.livejournal.com]

I'm now sorry I became a permanent member, since more now than ever, I feel I want nothing more to do with this journal.

Which is a deep shame, as LJ has been a wonderful place to meet new folk, and actually get to know them a bit more than, say, on asspig.com.

I also have several personal blogs on the web, but they simply don't have a community component like LJ, so that's not really an alternative.

Hmm... Perhaps I need to make "gayjournal.com"

[greatbearmd.livejournal.com]

It's almost as if LJ has merged with Bear411. Capricious censorship procedures rule the day at both sites now.

I left Bear411 mostly for that reason.

Unfortunately, someone has something at your desired URL. It just will not load.

[theoctothorpe.livejournal.com]

Considering the LJ code is actually open source, there is little barrier to entry. Hmm... Let's see if Tom gets his 1U server up and running, then we can start thinking about branching from there.

The biggest shame, however, is the loss of all that data. I've often said, it's not so much the initial post, but rather the replies to that post that are the real "meat" of the community. A blog isn't so much owned by a person, but rather those who contribute to it, and when a person decides to delete their account, *all* that "meat" goes away, without the consent of the other contributers.

The other, is the network effect. There are going to be many people on your Flist who won't hop on over to the new system. Of course, LJ does make it easy to subscribe to those people via RSS, so while it's not the same, at least you can keep abreast on posts.

[quirkstreet.livejournal.com]

This is one reason I never put the "this is the journal of an adult cocksucker who has been known to lick pussy too" disclaimer in my bio. I used to post more explicit sexual stuff in my blog than I do now, and I got a bit tired to doing so, but that's just me. I don't seek out kids to read my journal ... but if they stumbled on it, I have to think that my sheer method of how I think about things is at least as dangerous as my dong.

I started an alternate blog off-LJ the last time they pulled shit like this. I will have somewhere to migrate if this becomes intolerable. Problem is, it isn't as good of a social-networking venue.

[mrdreamjeans.livejournal.com]

It will be if you take enough of us with you.

[quirkstreet.livejournal.com]

Well, I'll probably start linking to it more, um, nakedly, from my bio page. What I mean, though, is that it doesn't have the same kinds of tools for easily "friending" people and collecting their pages. It doesn't foster the same kind of interchange, in my (admittedly minor) testing of it. Which is a shame.

And thank you for the compliment! ;-)

[theoctothorpe.livejournal.com]

I used to post more explicit sexual stuff in my blog than I do now, ::goes and sifts through your old posts::

As for the off-LJ thing, that's exactly the problem I mentioned as a reply to greatbearmd's post above.

[quirkstreet.livejournal.com]

This is a really great venue for *both* personal expression *and* connecting with others. In my non-exhaustive sample of web spaces that do either or both, it's been the one that does both best. As we were saying last weekend.

Other means can certainly be developed. And for those who have the stomach for designing and conducting a web business, now might be a good time.

[dr-scott.livejournal.com]

Obviously nothing prevents a kid from establishing an adult identity on LJ and reading whatever they want. This new policy is to respond to external accusations that LJ has smut kids can read without hindrance. If the user reporting system only applied to public posts, it might almost make sense... almost. But the "friends only" posts should suffer no interference.

I'm not willing to get excited about this, because I suspect LJ is trying to navigate through the shoals of fundie legal harassment and user outrage, and while clumsy I expect the policy is only a first effort. Of course it's silly, but then you'd have to reform the twisted little minds of "save the children" [from learning about reality] citizens to avoid this kind of fig leaf response.

[theoctothorpe.livejournal.com]

Clearly, I am willing to get excited about this, as I think this new mechanism creates Chilling Effects. Yes, I understand that the LJ gods get to dictate what can and can't "go" as far as content, however, the idea that now every user has the ability to stifle any other user is rather insane. There are no checks and balances.

Fuck fundie legal harassment. LJ already has a TOS, and and Abuse Ticket system. If someone is violating the TOS, a user can open a ticket. This new system only encourages an agenda of fear, and hate.

[dr-scott.livejournal.com]

I wonder if this is the result of the trouble ticket system becoming burdensome -- too much headcount to deal with. One would think it sensible to have LJ legally protected as a common carrier, with those who post deemed the only responsible parties for any legal problems with their material. But apparently this is not now the case; if I call up children and whisper dirty stories to them over the phone, it doesn't occur to anyone to ask the government to force the telephone company to install smut filters, and that should be true here as well.

I agree it's a good idea to protest this to make it clear that the adult communities here should not be harassed by random busybodies (which reminds me of the Simpson's episode where Ned Flanders reviews videotapes of TV shows for "bad" content and his kids suggest his time might be better spent looking for a new mommy.)

[mrdreamjeans.livejournal.com]

Sensible. I'm just reacting from selfish interests:) I don't want anything to interfere with my main source of communication with my friends.

[grandiva1968.livejournal.com]

…What he said, for the most part.

[cubdaddy.livejournal.com]

Now that LJ is in the parenting/babysitting business, it's only a matter of time before they start reporting "suspicious" posts to the office of Homeland Impurity. The new flagging feature is completely ridiculous.

[anarchy-lime.livejournal.com]

Re, the LJ alt:

From the faq. (emphasis mine).

# Entry Viewers: Logged-in viewers with accounts more than a month old can use the Flag icon on public entries to flag another entry, journal, or community as Explicit Adult, Offensive Content, Hate Speech, Illegal Activity, or Nude Images of Minors. The last three options will direct the user to the Abuse Reporting System where they will be asked to fill out a report including the URL of the content. Marking either of the first two options will send the report to a moderation queue. Once content (an entry, journal, or community) has been flagged by several users it will be sent to the Abuse Prevention Team for review. If the Abuse Prevention Team determines that the content meets the criteria for Explicit Adult, they will set the appropriate flags and the content will be unavailable to users under 18 as described above. If the Abuse Prevention Team determines that the content would be offensive to most, it will have an internal flag set and be excluded from filtered search results. No visible flag, lj-cut, or intermediate pages will be placed on Offensive Content.

I'm not sure I understand what the last sentence means. Other stuff there too which about collapsing content, which I'm also not sure I understand. I still support monkey-wrenching the system.

[grandiva1968.livejournal.com]

Doesn’t flickr already do something similar?

[anarchy-lime.livejournal.com]

Perhaps.

Though flickr is weird. I'm always getting the "Do you really want to Look Here" messages on things that are clearly fine. (Kittens, statues, flowers, whatever). So, they also employ some kind of brain-dead algorithm (as like all image recognition algorithms).

[cellboy.livejournal.com]

This is chilling. On the other hand I don't feel that us setting our own parameters is too bad. If I consider some of my content really bad, then I can set the parameters to protect from minors.But then again I may not. What's bad is someone else being able to flag us, then giving the moderators the "power" to decide what free speech is offensive or not, which can be very subjective.
Maybe we should all start flagging the lj moderators on all their entries. And the lj news bulletins too :-)

Sounds like maybe someone has been stirring them up in a legal sense (we are lawsuit crazy). So they are scrambling to somewhat cover their asses, just in case, or to get "them" off their backs.

http://community.livejournal.com/lj_biz/243697.html?thread=16377073#t16377073

[qnetter]

The blog owner has no recourse, and can't un-flag their own content that others have flagged. It's effectively a scarlet letter.

Really?

My reading of it is that, if someone other than the blog-owner flags it, it notifies SixApart but does NOT make it unviewable -- that action is only taken by the abuse team on multiple reports plus their own judgment. Am I misunderstanding this?

(I'm not saying I support it -- only that if it's opposed, it should be understood correctly in order to do so.)

[theoctothorpe.livejournal.com]

That's what it says, but it seems the reality is quite different. There is an opacity problem, because they say that it will only be looked at if "enough" users flag it as objectionable. Clearly, this can be gamed.

Also, "looking" at it also seems odd, as there have been people that have had their blogs flagged as objectionable even though it didn't contain anything but a "G" rated picture (a still shot from an HBO show, where the only person in it was fully clothed, and in no way implied anything sexual nor violent. It seems to me the mods have decided that if it's flagged by someone, flag the journal first, and ask questions later.... and when I say "ask questions" I actually mean "do nothing".

[furr-a-bruin.livejournal.com]

To an extent, I suppose it depends on how one looks at this. I'm not thrilled with the idea of other people being able to decide how my content should be rated.

On the other hand - I've just flagged my entire blog as "Explicit Adult Content" and I will no longer be putting nude bear pix or raunchy fiction behind LJ-Cuts.

BTW - the only problem with your Modest Proposal is that it won't kick in for a month, since accounts have to be that old to flag anything. I have a feeling The Powers That Be foresaw your reaction.

[theoctothorpe.livejournal.com]

I for one, welcome the new year ;-)

[theoctothorpe.livejournal.com]

Also, the down-side to doing what you propose is that I simply can't keep you on my flist, as I look at it at the office.

Point being, LJ has *many* ways of dealing with "adult" content, *and* it has a way of dealing with TOS violations. Why add this, which clearly leaves the door wide open for abuse?

[furr-a-bruin.livejournal.com]

Hmmm... I'd forgotten about that.

OK, so I'll still use LJ-Cuts - but only for the convenience of my friends. *grin*

I haven't gone to look, as this just occurred to me - are there any restrictions on someone having more than one Journal? I know some people have done it - with a separate "diary" and "sex" journals. I just don't know if that's merely been tolerated, or if it's actually OK.

[wrascalism.livejournal.com]

Why add this, which clearly leaves the door wide open for abuse?

Excellent question. Did you ask the powers that be this, citing your friend's flagging?

[sultmhoor.livejournal.com]

Your protest is unlikely to make an impact in any way. Flagging is limited to being done by accounts that have been around a month, and you are limited to five flags per 24 hour period. (http://community.livejournal.com/lj_biz/243697.html?thread=15393009#t15393009)

[theoctothorpe.livejournal.com]

It's a question of scaling. It will work, if we want it to.

[gryphons-hole.livejournal.com]

My head hurts.

[theoctothorpe.livejournal.com]

Here, let Daddy hold you close, and tell you everything will be alright =)

Oh

[tkn1114.livejournal.com]

I love that icon and matching comment!

Re: Oh

[gryphons-hole.livejournal.com]

*bows*

Thank you.
I call that one WTF!OMGs!EWWWW!

It is a good catch all icon...

but gay people dont' want to state their age!

[tkn1114.livejournal.com]

esp. the... never mind.

Is this all that serious?

Re: but gay people dont' want to state their age!

[theoctothorpe.livejournal.com]

All too.

Out of left field...

[danthered.livejournal.com]

Y'know, I've wondered from time to time why nobody's ever put together a blog site based on phpBB. I'm sure someone can come up with a few reasons it's a poor idea, but I can think of a fair number of reasons it's a good one. Searchability, for just one example.

A thought provoking post.

[sfogreekbear.livejournal.com]

I have to agree with you on the sentiment of what you write, but I'm not sure I agree with the modest proposal.

In my opinion of the issue that you have described, there are 2 problems. For the first: Whether we admit it, or not, we all have opinions on every topic. Politics, morality, humor, sex etc. Who is to say what is or is not appropriate? The Saint? The Sinner? The Wiseman? The Illiterate? The Rich? The Homeless? What I find disturbing is that anyone could have the power to censor someone else's opinion. Have you ever seen a thread on a queernet list burst into flames? Would you trust someone from there, who's emotions rule their lives to make this determination? Or perhaps someone from the Christian right?

The second is is the topic of "inappropriate"... that is SOOo.... subjective. We are all people on here of different backgrounds, ethnicities, ages, and sexes. Some are adults, some are not. And I am NOT referring to one's legal age. Like you have mentioned, I feel it is up to the poster to self identify things that they may feel are "hot buttons", for parents to monitor what their children have access to, and for all of us to take responsibility for what we choose to read/ do/ say. After all, we can all push the delete button.