Even in the democratic and idiosyncratic world that is cyberspace, there is a case for a certain degree of regulation. No-one, I suggest, would claim that absolutely unrestricted freedom of expression is a viable option, because there are some things that are completely beyond the pale, particularly in terms, from my point of view, of individuals being coerced into things they are not willing or able to do.
Having said that, the other side of the coin is that control can easily tip into censorship, that certain vested interests can deem opinions, points of view, even complete lifestyles 'unacceptable', despite those opinions or lifestyles being perfectly legal, and I suggest, decent, and these value judgments can lead to gross injustices. One such injustice has taken place in the last 24 hours, with the deletion of a blog maintained by a person who only an utter bigot could accuse of being anything other than a genuinely good man with the best interests of others at heart.
I'm speaking, as many will already know, of 'tony's red flash'. Tony, or Tman, as some will know him, had just made his 100th post, and although I know no more of him than I've learned online, via his blog and a few e-mail exchanges, he appears to me to be a thoroughly genuine person, who honestly cares for and wants to help others, so for his blog to be deleted, for reasons which haven't been disclosed to him, and about which he can't find anyone to talk to, is an utter disgrace - or a piece of gratuitous censorship of GLBT issues, which is would be an equal, if not greater disgrace.
Google is a large and very successful business, but that, in my opinion, doesn't give them any sort of right to act as judge and jury on questions of morality. I might be thinking along unduly cynical lines here, but could it be that Google have been threatened with loss of advertising revenue, which, of course, is the 'cash cow', by some of the more reactionary elements in American society, inspired by what strikes me as a particularly intolerant brand of fundamentalist Christianity with a very narrow-minded outlook on life, and a distinct tendency to say 'do as I say, don't do as I do'. I'm an unapologetic atheist, but might I venture to say that some of these people might be well advised to consider the biblical quotation 'let he who is without sin, cast the first stone'.
I sincerely hope that Tony is back in Blogland, in some way or other, very soon.
Love & best wishes to all
Sammy B
He's back!!!!
ReplyDeletehttp://tredflash.wordpress.com/
Peace <3
Jay
Hello Jay
ReplyDeleteI e-mailed Tony this morning, and he replied mentioning a Wordpress blog - thanks for the link.
Love & best wishes
Sammy B
Nuking Tony's blog just highlights the farce of it all. If any blogger showed a responsible, caring, moral approach to cyberspace it was Tony.
ReplyDeleteGoogle make it clear, their "child safety policy" prohibits anything condoning the sexual activity of children. It does not appear to matter who that activity is with, either adults or other children, so long as a significant part of the audience is adult men. So all it takes is one hater to hit the "Report Abuse" button located so conveniently at the top of each screen.
Hello Billy
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree with you more about Tony and his blog - if he is 'offensive', then very few people are safe.
As I said in the post, Google's 'child safety policy' appears to me to be part of an ill-disguised attempt to impose a right-wing, fundamentalist Christian world view onto cyberspace, and thereby to ensure that the corporate dollars keep flowing in. If good people like Tony get trampled in the process, that's just tough. I'll be backing my blogs up after every post, and no mistake.
Love & best wishes
Sammy B
It is clear that very few people are safe from the 'flag 'em up' brigade (very similar to the 'string 'em up' and 'hang 'em and flog 'em' brigades).
ReplyDeleteSeveral good, campaigning gay blogs have fallen victim to this latest round of 'robotic' activity (which is what Google is trying to say it is). Of course if you say that 'a spam blog' (google's terminology from it's TOS) is a blog categorised by a lack of original content and with many links to other blogs then any successful picture blog of any sort is liable to be deleted as potential spam.
Nobody denies that the spam is a nuisance but this policy is throwing lots of babies out with the bath water - and not just gay blogs either.
I'm glad 'T-man' is keep going - we need at least to keep the GLBT flag flying from as many blogs and bloggers as we can. We must not give in to a tool which is currently being indiscriminately used to batter the gay blogging community yet again.
Hello Micky
ReplyDeleteThis is rapidly becoming a free speech issue, as I see it, and not just affecting GLBT blogging, as you suggest. The irony of it is that the worst offenders in terms of trying to gag people with 'offensive' views are some of the denizens of the so-called 'Land of the Free'. Free to think and act like 'one of us', or not free at all, as far as I can see. Of course, to deflect attention away from what's actually happening, these same self-appointed 'moral guardians' merely shout 'protect our children' or, more likely, 'paedophile' at every opportunity, knowing that almost no-one would then have the courage to put their head above the parapet and say anything to the contrary, for fear of being tarred with that particular brush. The U.S. has made great play of opposing undemocratic, right-wing theocracies in recent years, but seems to me to rapidly becoming just another example of their supposed foe, while politicians in this country, and many others, of nominally left and right wing persuasions, stand on the sidelines cheering them on. As a bisexual, hebephilic atheist, I can see an indefinite 'holiday' in a concentration camp heading my way some time soon, along with many others, unless people wake up to what's being done, supposedly in their name.
Love & best wishes
Sammy B