Patreon CEO on Content Policy, Lauren Southern, and IGD
JackConteExtras0 HN recommenders · 2017–2019
112K views · commentary · news · Uploaded 2017-07-28
Patreon CEO Jack Conte explains how Patreon thinks about content policy and why it removed the pages of Lauren Southern, members of Defend Europe and IGD. He also describes the company's trust and safety commitments.
HN commenters cite it as Patreon's own explanation of the ban, which they find reasonable and sincere.
42:29YouTube's copyright system isn't broken. The world's is.
Tom Scott
57:19Republic, Lost | Lawrence Lessig | Talks at Google
Talks at Google
1:00:56Winners Take All | Anand Giridharadas | Talks at Google
Talks at Google
21:08Christopher Hitchens - Free Speech
hitch archive
6:59The Problem With Facebook
2veritasium
18:20We the People, and the Republic we must reclaim | Lawrence Lessig
TED
15:47VidMe or Why Platforms Aren't Your Friends
Folding Ideas
19:00Sinclair Broadcast Group: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)
LastWeekTonight
4 comments from Hacker News
> I've seen Patreon kicking people off their platform for political reasons […] Have you? Are you thinking of Lauren Southern? Or maybe It's Going Down? The explanation from Patreon is very reasonable: [VIDEO]
See [VIDEO] , Patreon's presentation of evidence that they were blocking ships, and that Southern was actively involved. Note that this evidence is video that Southern herself published before she realized that these actions would endanger her own income stream, rather than just people in the ocean.
I totally get where you're coming from. Though our conclusions differ, I think our reasoning is very similar. I doubt these bans are purely mercenary. The CEO of Patreon seems to be doing this because he believes it's the right thing. If you watch his video responding to the ban of Lauren Southern last year[1] (a decision I agree with, BTW), he seems totally sincere. He also understands the magnitude of his responsibility to patrons. I think Patreon is being penny wise and pound foolish. Their social signalling helps them grab a larger chunk of a smaller pie. Every high profile ban alienates a small fraction of users, but it's a different fraction every time. It doesn't take many before Patreon's reputation is bad enough to dissuade new creators from using it. It might already be too late for them to turn around. 1. [VIDEO]
Manifest observable behavior is just an evidence-based way to determine breach of policy[0]. It's literally the most rational way to go about enforcing policy. Insofar as suspensions seem "random" because they're done by fast and loose algorithms (which are the only enforcement mechanism that scales), I agree though: that shit sucks, and it affects many sides. Many sides. When Zuckerberg was in front of Congress, he was repeatedly scolded by Congresspeople for not doing enough to remove bad stuff. He responded by saying that there's too much bad stuff for humans to keep track of, and that Facebook is working really hard on AI capable of handling it. Yay. 0: [VIDEO]