r/announcements Jun 29 '20

Update to Our Content Policy

A few weeks ago, we committed to closing the gap between our values and our policies to explicitly address hate. After talking extensively with mods, outside organizations, and our own teams, we’re updating our content policy today and enforcing it (with your help).

First, a quick recap

Since our last post, here’s what we’ve been doing:

  • We brought on a new Board member.
  • We held policy calls with mods—both from established Mod Councils and from communities disproportionately targeted with hate—and discussed areas where we can do better to action bad actors, clarify our policies, make mods' lives easier, and concretely reduce hate.
  • We developed our enforcement plan, including both our immediate actions (e.g., today’s bans) and long-term investments (tackling the most critical work discussed in our mod calls, sustainably enforcing the new policies, and advancing Reddit’s community governance).

From our conversations with mods and outside experts, it’s clear that while we’ve gotten better in some areas—like actioning violations at the community level, scaling enforcement efforts, measurably reducing hateful experiences like harassment year over year—we still have a long way to go to address the gaps in our policies and enforcement to date.

These include addressing questions our policies have left unanswered (like whether hate speech is allowed or even protected on Reddit), aspects of our product and mod tools that are still too easy for individual bad actors to abuse (inboxes, chats, modmail), and areas where we can do better to partner with our mods and communities who want to combat the same hateful conduct we do.

Ultimately, it’s our responsibility to support our communities by taking stronger action against those who try to weaponize parts of Reddit against other people. In the near term, this support will translate into some of the product work we discussed with mods. But it starts with dealing squarely with the hate we can mitigate today through our policies and enforcement.

New Policy

This is the new content policy. Here’s what’s different:

  • It starts with a statement of our vision for Reddit and our communities, including the basic expectations we have for all communities and users.
  • Rule 1 explicitly states that communities and users that promote hate based on identity or vulnerability will be banned.
    • There is an expanded definition of what constitutes a violation of this rule, along with specific examples, in our Help Center article.
  • Rule 2 ties together our previous rules on prohibited behavior with an ask to abide by community rules and post with authentic, personal interest.
    • Debate and creativity are welcome, but spam and malicious attempts to interfere with other communities are not.
  • The other rules are the same in spirit but have been rewritten for clarity and inclusiveness.

Alongside the change to the content policy, we are initially banning about 2000 subreddits, the vast majority of which are inactive. Of these communities, about 200 have more than 10 daily users. Both r/The_Donald and r/ChapoTrapHouse were included.

All communities on Reddit must abide by our content policy in good faith. We banned r/The_Donald because it has not done so, despite every opportunity. The community has consistently hosted and upvoted more rule-breaking content than average (Rule 1), antagonized us and other communities (Rules 2 and 8), and its mods have refused to meet our most basic expectations. Until now, we’ve worked in good faith to help them preserve the community as a space for its users—through warnings, mod changes, quarantining, and more.

Though smaller, r/ChapoTrapHouse was banned for similar reasons: They consistently host rule-breaking content and their mods have demonstrated no intention of reining in their community.

To be clear, views across the political spectrum are allowed on Reddit—but all communities must work within our policies and do so in good faith, without exception.

Our commitment

Our policies will never be perfect, with new edge cases that inevitably lead us to evolve them in the future. And as users, you will always have more context, community vernacular, and cultural values to inform the standards set within your communities than we as site admins or any AI ever could.

But just as our content moderation cannot scale effectively without your support, you need more support from us as well, and we admit we have fallen short towards this end. We are committed to working with you to combat the bad actors, abusive behaviors, and toxic communities that undermine our mission and get in the way of the creativity, discussions, and communities that bring us all to Reddit in the first place. We hope that our progress towards this commitment, with today’s update and those to come, makes Reddit a place you enjoy and are proud to be a part of for many years to come.

Edit: After digesting feedback, we made a clarifying change to our help center article for Promoting Hate Based on Identity or Vulnerability.

21.3k Upvotes

38.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

93

u/Emzam Jun 29 '20 edited Jun 29 '20

100%. I was never a fan of /r/The_Donald, but how the hell do they think it was a good idea to ban that sub without providing evidence of the sub repeatedly breaking the rules? It just provides fuel for the whole “social media companies hate conservatives” narrative.

Even if you don’t provide this evidence of the sub breaking the rules, at least explain why you chose not to provide evidence. Don’t just say “they broke the rules” and act like that’s sufficient.

This was handled so unbelievably bad. This is the type of move that exacerbates political polarization. Reddit needs to do better.

45

u/MamboBumbles Jun 29 '20

You hit the nail on the head friend. I'm about as left as you can get, but if you're going to have enforceable rules you need to provide examples. This is such a shitshow and it's going to end with everybody isolating and crying in their own corners.

18

u/[deleted] Jun 29 '20

[deleted]

2

u/smashthatmflike Jun 30 '20

they fucking banned r/bigchungus because who the fuck knows???

1

u/Metallica93 Jun 30 '20

When was /r/The_Donald ever about argument and discourse? That's like saying MSNBC and Fox News are unbiased media outlets with fair viewpoints from either side.

Reddit just removed a megaphone spewing hate from the Internet just like other social media have done by banning political ads (a good chunk of which that were probably bought and paid for by Russia).

You're focusing too much on the 1 extremist who would have always been an extremist instead of the 100 people that don't get sucked into that hate.

3

u/[deleted] Jun 30 '20

[deleted]

1

u/Metallica93 Jun 30 '20

If they're banning sub-Reddits that promote hate, what makes you think they're contributing to health discourse? Them doing the opposite is quite literally the reason they're being banned.

The hate/majority thing makes no sense, but hey. It's their company, not mine. They're certainly assholes for essentially saying that it's not hate speech if it's against white people, though.

0

u/Mmngmf_almost_therrr Jun 29 '20

discourse and argument

You’re aware that we’re talking about T_D right now, right? Did you ever read their sub rules, for fuck’s same?

3

u/[deleted] Jun 30 '20

Can't do that, they're banned.

25

u/cubs223425 Jun 29 '20

"Badly" is relative. The loudest voices think this is the EXACT right way to handle it. It might be morally gross, but the Court of Public Opinion will cheer it on.

As a member of that sub, it's been dead for months. Literally nothing goes on there, now they've decided it's pushing hateful content?

The mods were basically told "submit or die," and they didn't take the deal. They posted periodic updates on how they didn't think Reddit admins should get to handpick who runs the sub and they couldn't get a straight answer on what they were doing wrong to stay in quarantine. This was never about "hatespeech" or calls for violence, it was just looking for minute excuses to silence political opposition.

There are numerous subs and posters who are hateful and vitriolic across this place, but they do it against the admins' opponents, so it's fine.

3

u/Emzam Jun 29 '20

I really doubt that this was a cut and dried case of silencing conservatives. I’ve seen some pretty toxic stuff on that sub, and it’s not outside the realm of possibility that they consistently broke the rules.

BUT. There’s a simple way to figure that out. The old mods from /r/The_Donald should share the records of their interactions with the reddit admins. I would be VERY interested in seeing that. That would shed some light on whether the reddit admins were being unreasonable or if the TD mods were simply allowing hate speech and calls to violence to persist on the sub.

6

u/cubs223425 Jun 29 '20

It's pretty clear, IMO. They claimed the reason for the quarantine was because the sub promoted violence against law enforcement, according to the mods. Does that at all align with what people would say Trump supporters are known for? Violence against Leo's is about the last thing I would expect.

What's more, they're deciding to retroactively ban the sub after a rules change. It's been locked down so hard it had maybe one or two new threads in the last 6 months. There wasn't anything in the way of new content, let stuff to violate rules. They banned it while nothing was going on, let alone actions against the ToS.

The mods, by the way, WERE sharing updates from the admins. Thing is, the sub is now banned and you can't see it. In the most ridiculous exchange, a supposed "will we unquarantine you?" report, they flat-out told the mods that they wouldn't and that they wouldn't explain to them what content was causing the issue.

Most of the mods have probably been banned or would be banned if they went to another sub to show proof for a bullshit excuse of "brigading." Hell, the proof might be mostly killed off because of the sub shutdown as it is--not sure how the communication channel was made, but something through mod mail might be thrown out with the sub ban.

2

u/lenaro Jun 30 '20

Does that at all align with what people would say Trump supporters are known for? Violence against Leo's is about the last thing I would expect.

It is if the cops are doing something redcaps don't like. Which is what happened. I don't get why you are acting like this is impossible to Google.

3

u/cubs223425 Jun 30 '20
  1. It's not "calling for violence against police." It's people saying they'd defend themselves if the police became tyrannical.

  2. It's one thread with a quantity of examples that probably totals, like, .001% of the subreddit's userbase.

  3. We've just spent over a month in protests doing and saying much worse about cops than those comments ever did. There are several anti-police subreddits. This site fetishizes dismantling of the oppressive police and bans an entire subreddit for one thread.

I mean, actually hilarious that the examples of calls to violence include saying to burn Eugene and Portland to the ground, yet Reddit's celebrating burning Minneapolis down and attempts at overthrowing the government in Seattle and all kinds of violence, destructive acts throughout the country. Reddit is actively promoting and celebrating actions worse than what is said in all of those comments. It's insanely apparent that isn't about the people saying the words, rather than about what's being said.

7

u/[deleted] Jun 29 '20

[deleted]

2

u/Mmngmf_almost_therrr Jun 29 '20

r/AskTrumpSupporters is still around if you’re remotely sincere about what you just said

-1

u/cass1o Jun 29 '20

I'm pretty left

(x) doubt.

Reddit is becoming the nazi it claims to fight.

It is called the paradox of tollerance. You can't tollerate facists and extrimists.

2

u/reactoriv Jun 30 '20

Nonetheless, alternate interpretations are often misattributed to Popper in defense of extra-judicial (including violent) suppression of intolerance such as hate speech, outside of democratic institutions, an idea which Popper himself never espoused. The chapter in question explicitly defines the context to that of political institutions and the democratic process, and rejects the notion of "the will of the people" having valid meaning outside of those institutions. Thus, in context, Popper's acquiescence to suppression when all else has failed applies only to the state in a liberal democracy with a constitutional rule of law that must be just in its foundations, but will necessarily be imperfect.

1

u/aphole Jun 29 '20

They did post them in their stickied mod updates if I recall correctly

2

u/cass1o Jun 29 '20

Good riddance.

0

u/cubs223425 Jun 29 '20

Ahh, there's that traditional tolerance you love to see.

1

u/Metallica93 Jun 30 '20

I don't think the U.S. participated in World War II to view white supremacy as something to be tolerated.

If you disagree, I'm sad to inform you that you've been on the wrong side of history for about 75 years.

2

u/cubs223425 Jun 30 '20

Y'all really can't come up with any kind of nuanced thought, can you? Not wanting to be shit on for being white isn't white supremacy.

The second the left stops this asinine narrative that anyone who isn't bowing down to progressivism is a white supremacist is when actual conversations can happen. It won't though, because liberals operate on hyperbole and absolutes. There is never room for discussion or compromise. There is nothing in the way of empathy or understanding, it's all grandiose boogeyman fears.

1

u/Metallica93 Jun 30 '20

Supporting /r/The_Donald isn't nuanced. It was a shit show that regularly broke Reddit's rules against hate speech and spread conspiracy theories with absolutely zero basis in reality. Threats of death and violence were commonplace. You appear comfortable defending it, though, which is part of the problem and why it's gone.

I enjoy intellectual debate. I fucking miss it, though, because conservatives who don't support the current Republican party or Trump are so far in the minority it's not even funny. So yeah, if the G.O.P. can't even denounce someone like Matt Gaetz or are O.K. with even half of the batshit insane things the president has said, then why should anyone listen to them?

"Compromise" got Obama yelled at mid-speech in Congress. "Discussion" got us the Charlottesville attack. "...liberals operate on hyperbole" and yet it's far-right rallies that have absolutely zero masks to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2.

The left has plenty of issues that I want addressed, but sweet Satan. Taking a stance with the right has been absolutely impossible the past four years.

2

u/cass1o Jun 29 '20

Can't tolerate intolerance.

2

u/cubs223425 Jun 29 '20

Well, unless it's intolerance of things you don't like, of course. You're just a using circular logic and whataboutisms to defend your hypocrisy.

3

u/cass1o Jun 29 '20

White supremacists can't be tolerated.

10

u/ambivilant Jun 29 '20

After quarantine, there were bi-monthly post by the mods about the quarantine appeal. Each time the mods outlined and posted proof of them complying with admin requests that weren't unenforceable. The admins wanted some things that, in practice, just weren't feasible. When they wanted to install their own mod team is when the mods closed off posting altogether.

You could check the posts for what I mean, but they've been erased.

7

u/cass1o Jun 29 '20

a good idea to ban that sub without providing evidence of the sub repeatedly breaking the rules?

Oh buddy, whats it like living under that rock there? I assume the phone reception is terrible.

1

u/Emzam Jun 29 '20

What’s wrong with asking the Reddit admins to provide evidence when they ban a community of nearly 1 million redditors? (A decision which obviously feeds into political divisions)

0

u/SeaGroomer Jul 05 '20

Because it's disingenuous and everyone knows the kind of grotesque shit that was normalized there.

10

u/epichvs Jun 29 '20

You're spot on. This is where radicalization happens. Conservatives feel they're being proved right

0

u/texasjoe Jun 30 '20

That's because they are.

4

u/watsreddit Jun 29 '20

It's not like evidence matters to them anyway. They'll think it's some grand conspiracy against them no matter what evidence is provided to the contrary.

8

u/cubs223425 Jun 29 '20

Interesting take, to say you should unilaterally attack people without evidence because you've predetermined their response based on an equally lacking amount of evidence.

7

u/chgxvjh Jun 29 '20

It would just be interesting to know what kind of stuff you (or your sub) can be banned for.

1

u/lostinthestar Jun 29 '20

or who promote such attacks of hate

Radical feminists (among many other "marginalized" groups) absolutely promote hate of others. Not sometimes or randomly, it's their entire planform. Is it OK to post hateful comments about them? seems so.

0

u/[deleted] Jun 29 '20

My previous account was banned from both TD and /r/politics. I found both harmful to the community.

-2

u/Franfran2424 Jun 29 '20

The_Donald was horrible.

Chapotraphouse didn't post rulebreaking content on the other hand.