Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Information wants to be free.

If free speech is paramount to democracy, we shouldn't discriminate. Most people understand there is an information war at play. Most people know that information is either propaganda or carries an agenda. If you cut one opponent's voice, then it's not balanced. Why shouldn't we defend the right for Russian media to promote their narrative? Besides, legitimate, unrelated stories from one perspective also end up ignored.

Censoring Russian media only further isolates Russia, which is counterproductive. That also further separates the world from Russia and understanding regular Russian people.

Last, there is the argument that understanding the Russian state is also critical at times like these. You can also read intent between the lines. Understanding the current opinion of those in power in that part of the world is of the essence.



Again, I see sites like reddit and Youtube as megaphones. Not being on them doesn't stop your freedom to speech. Information was is also asymmetric, it takes a fraction the effort and time to spread lies and propaganda, than it takes to fact check and correct it. So especially when the people spreading lies have a lot to gain (many are making a ton of money spreading lies that get clicks), I absolutely don't believe such voice should be given a "platform". They are perfectly free to spread their own speech by themselves, but they are not entitled to free amplification and spread from Youtube or Twitter.


Democracy discriminates based on citizenship, so discriminating free speech based on citizenship makes a clear match.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: