Although the platform has explicit guidelines banning content that incites violence, a November article in The Atlantic pointed out at least 16 different newsletters with Nazi symbols, as well as many more supporting far-right extremism, leading to calls for change from many Substack authors and a refusal from leadership.

  • phcorcoran@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    6 months ago

    I mean, Substack lit all the benefit of the doubt I had for them on fire with their previous response.

    This new action doesn’t restore that, but all things being equal, I do want nazi shitheads to be de-platformed and have their funding cut off.

    I think one can both acknowledge that they finally did a move in the correct direction and still think that they suck overall

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      They didn’t, though. This is a PR move. They banned 5 people, none of whom had a substantial following. The popular Nazis remain. As I said above, they did the absolute bare minimum.

      • phcorcoran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        I agree with you; I think it is indeed the absolute bare minimum they had to do but I also agree with xc2215x that it’s a good move. They moved from -100 to -99 on my shithead-o-meter scale

    • forrgott
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Fair enough. Pretty sure I can agree with that!