I think any journalist who operates in an environment where they concede that they could be banned at any moment is succumbing to a form of voluntary censorship. I experienced this in South Africa, as others did I am sure and remember the idea of 'banning'.
Having experienced this I assure you it's not the mark of a 'free speech' environment.
You can read about it here. https://www.britannica.com/topic/banning-South-African-law
@RobHadley @BylinesNetwork@bylines.social
This is why it seems absurd to me that people are moving to post. news. The only difference it offers is format; it's still opaque and private and came out of the same VC/techbro incubator universe as twiter. It's also got almost nothing in the way of an "about" page relating to policies.
It's like buying something in a stapled-shut brown paper bag because it has "not that other thing that went bad on you" sharpied on it.
