One of the big advantages often presented for decentralized media using blockchain technology such as Steemit is the fact that it is resistant to censorship. We are told that Steemit will bring improvements over more traditional media because everything is permanently recorded via the blockchain and cannot be removed.
But what difference does is make if something is permanently recorded somewhere, if nobody will be able to see it?
The economics of Steemit mean that there is a strong disincentive to post anything controversial. People creating posts will be encouraged post things which most people agree with - and to keep uncomfortable truths to themselves. But worse than that, the process of surfacing quality content from the fast flowing 'new' section to places where it will get more views is based on people trying to pick popular content in order to make money from correct picks: this means that even people who agree with a controversial opinion have an incentive to refrain from upvoting it so they don't waste their voting power and hence earning potential on stories which will attract downvotes.
Controversial content may not only attract downvotes, but it may even cause people who strongly disagree to go on a downvoting spree to reduce the visibility and earnings of all an author's content. There is nothing to stop this kind of 'downvote war' breaking out.
As a result, whilst any content may be published, the practical reality of the Steemit platform is that it will have dramatically higher levels of censorship and self-censorship than any other type of media platform.
You make a valid point but I disagree regarding the rewards system encouraging people to NOT post controversial content.
People will eventually be fed up with the same "Hi, I'm a girl I like traveling and by the way, here's some bikini photos", "I made this website with beautiful graphs", "This is another average sob story" or "How to make money on steemit" posts. I, for one, already am.
Once this becomes a more widespread opinion it will not go unnoticed because suddenly such posts won't rack in $1k-$10k. I'm sure that will bring quite the revelation to the steemers, and hopefully help them realize that generic content is nothing special.
Hopefully you are right and that will bring more diversity of successful content, but I don't think it will help truly controversial (not evil, not hateful, but controversial) content.
The First Amendment doesn't say "shall make no laws regard Free Speech... unless it's hateful." Hateful thoughts will still exist, and will find voice in other ways, You can't stop it by silencing it. You can only educate, and do what Gandhi suggested - be the change you want to see in the world, not force the change you want to see in the world. If you initiate aggression against hateful people, how are you better than they?
Truth. Thank you.
maybe some form of censorship is needed? i can imagine that abusive posts can easily be downvoted, but what if there is a hate campaign against a particular minority group?
The problem with this line of reasoning imho, which does seem like common sense on the surface, is that there is no reason to believe that the censorship will be any more moral or any less hateful than the things you imagine would need censoring.
I think that the Steemit community has the largest overall influence on what gets upvoted. Everything on Steemit can be googled anyway. The controversy-rating of a topic is all relative to the viewer. We could be talking about pizza, and someone could get butthurt because it isn't authentic Chicago pan bread but instead it's some kind of waffle with cheese on top.
What is controversial is relative, but the degree to which controversial content is allowed to be visible is not a relativistic thing, its absolute.
Agreed! I just had my first post down voted and hidden... When I first came to Steemit, I thought it could be a place for me to host a blog about my various businesses. But due to Steemcleaners... I can see that this will not be such a platform for me. If I'm not allowed to place banners on my blog or any types of referral links, this place is of no use to me. Actually it's no better than Facebook... So be it... Steemit should just be honest. There's no censorship as long as you post things that they agree with... 🤦♂️
I really like your level of thinking on this. I was thinking similar just now and posted this comment elsewhere "What worries me with steem is that content will become more and more homogenised as people seek to provide content that appeals to the main stream, in an attempt to gain more upvotes.
The danger with this is that as a community we may start to think less out of the box. People will be on a constant crusade to quickly upvote and share in the next "popular" post and move on to the next, instead of thinking deeply and perhaps working together towards solving some of this world's problems.
But I guess if people want to see cats and tanned skin, then give it to them right!"
This platform is a very intriguing social experiment. I'm glad to be here witnessing it.