16
You can finally do your laundry.
The rest of the democrats watched as one of their own sacrificed themselves for the good of the herd. It's a good strategy to keep people like you thinking it's only the "bad apples" that ruin the party. The party can eject people who do not hold the party line, though, and they never do. There is always a rotating heel in the ranks, who defects at the final hour, so the rest of the party can shake their fists at them. When the lights go out, and they're all in the locker room, though, the party is glad they didn't need to show their full hand.
Popular public support for a given policy has no impact on its implementation. When changes are made through a truly democratic process, outside party lines, and not reliant on the party, the parties come together to dismantle it.
lol yeah you're the shittier one.
Greta is a fucking legend. I can't believe how fucking based she's become.
They have to refund me, BLAH! I'll let you know when I've sent it for real this time.
Oops! I sent a card but to myself I'm working on getting it transferred to your email! I'll keep you in the loop.
Lenin, frozen in carbonite.
In the hands of a skilled craftsmen, the machine enhances the productive process of the craftsmen. In their shop, as part of their labor process, making bespoke things, the machine serves the craftsmen.
However, the machine also reduces the socially necessary labor time for the mass production of a given thing. The laborers within this production environment are not craftsmen. All they know is how to operate the machine. Making parts of an eventual whole they'll never have a full hand in producing.
As the laborers are replaced and the machine persists, there is less demand for the kills of a craftsmen, and the new laborers do not need to be trained at the same capacity as the craftsmen. This process naturally deskills the labor force as time progresses.
You find it useful because you are trained and can more effectively describe the issue its resolving because the code is the result of your skill and training. You are the craftsmen in this situation. Soon however, you will become the supervisor to juniors who have even less of any understanding then you had in their position. Producing code using a machine, with little understanding of it's output, leaving you to pick up the slack.
Sounds like something you could easily orchestrate with enough people. Monitor the sub you're interested in, use some burner accounts to fish for inactivity from the mods. Spin up accounts that create posts which break the rules and upvote those posts. Once there are enough posts in the sub, use a primary account to report all the posts to the admins and ping the admin team about the lack of moderation.
You can appeal to Reddit to take over a community if it "appears" a community is going "unmoderated". I have no idea what they do internally to identify a subreddit that is "unmoderated" but it would appear to be pretty easy to do, since it seems to happen pretty regularly.
70
No One Knows How to Deal With 'Student-on-Student' AI CSAM
(www.404media.co)
cross-posted from: https://rss.ponder.cat/post/193608
Schools, parents, police, and existing laws are not prepared to deal with the growing problem of students and minors using generative AI tools to create child sexual abuse material of other their peers, according to a new report from researchers at Stanford Cyber Policy Center.
The report, which is based on public records and interviews with NGOs, internet platforms staff, law enforcement, government employees, legislators, victims, parents, and groups that offer online training to schools, found that despite the harm that nonconsensual causes, the practice has been normalized by mainstream online platforms and certain online communities.
“Respondents told us there is a sense of normalization or legitimacy among those who create and share AI CSAM,” the report said. “This perception is fueled by open discussions in clear web forums, a sense of community through the sharing of tips, the accessibility of nudify apps, and the presence of community members in countries where AI CSAM is legal.”
The report says that while children may recognize that AI-generating nonconsensual content is wrong they can assume “it’s legal, believing that if it were truly illegal, there wouldn’t be an app for it.” The report, which cites several 404 Media stories about this issue, notes that this normalization is in part a result of many “nudify” apps being available on the Google and Apple app stores, and that their ability to AI-generate nonconsensual nudity is openly advertised to students on Google and social media platforms like Instagram and TikTok. One NGO employee told the authors of the report that “there are hundreds of nudify apps” that lack basic built-in safety features to prevent the creation of CSAM, and that even as an expert in the field he regularly encounters AI tools he’s never heard of, but that on certain social media platforms “everyone is talking about them.”
The report notes that while 38 U.S. states now have laws about AI CSAM and the newly signed federal Take It Down Act will further penalize AI CSAM, states “failed to anticipate that student-on-student cases would be a common fact pattern. As a result, that wave of legislation did not account for child offenders. Only now are legislators beginning to respond, with measures such as bills defining student-on-student use of nudify apps as a form of cyberbullying.”
One law enforcement officer told the researchers how accessible these apps are. “You can download an app in one minute, take a picture in 30 seconds, and that child will be impacted for the rest of their life,” they said.
One student victim interviewed for the report said that she struggled to believe that someone actually AI-generated nude images of her when she first learned about them. She knew other students used AI for writing papers, but was not aware people could use AI to create nude images. “People will start rumors about anything for no reason,” she said. “It took a few days to believe that this actually happened.”
Another victim and her mother interviewed for the report described the shock of seeing the images for the first time. “Remember Photoshop?” the mother asked, “I thought it would be like that. But it’s not. It looks just like her. You could see that someone might believe that was really her naked.”
One victim, whose original photo was taken from a non-social media site, said that someone took it and “ruined it by making it creepy [...] he turned it into a curvy boob monster, you feel so out of control.”
In an email from a victim to school staff, one victim said “I was unable to concentrate or feel safe at school. I felt very vulnerable and deeply troubled. The investigation, media coverage, meetings with administrators, no-contact order [against the perpetrator], and the gossip swirl distracted me from school and class work. This is a terrible way to start high school.”
One mother of a victim the researchers interviewed for the report feared that the images could crop up in the future, potentially affecting her daughter’s college applications, job opportunities, or relationships. “She also expressed a loss of trust in teachers, worrying that they might be unwilling to write a positive college recommendation letter for her daughter due to how events unfolded after the images were revealed,” the report said.
💡Has AI-generated content been a problem in your school? I would love to hear from you. Using a non-work device, you can message me securely on Signal at emanuel.404. Otherwise, send me an email at [email protected].
In 2024, Jason and I wrote a story about how one school in Washington state struggled to deal with its students using a nudify app on other students. The story showed how teachers and school administration weren’t familiar with the technology, and initially failed to report the incident to the police even though it legally qualified as “sexual abuse” and school administrators are “mandatory reporters.”
According to the Stanford report, many teachers lack training on how to respond to a nudify incident at their school. A Center for Democracy and Technology report found that 62% of teachers say their school has not provided guidance on policies for handling incidents
involving authentic or AI nonconsensual intimate imagery. A 2024 survey of teachers and principals found that 56 percent did not get any training on “AI deepfakes.” One provider told the authors of the report that while many schools have crisis management plans for “active shooter situations, they had never heard of a school having a crisis management plan for a nudify incident, or even for a real nude image of a student being circulated.”
The report makes several recommendations to schools, like providing victims with third-party counseling services and academic accommodations, drafting language to communicate with the school community when an incident occurs, ensuring that students are not discouraged or punished for reporting incidents, and contacting the school’s legal counsel to assess the school’s legal obligations, including its responsibility as a “mandatory reporter.”
The authors also emphasized the importance of anonymous tip lines that allow students to report incidents safely. It cites two incidents that were initially discovered this way, one in Pennsylvania where a students used the state’s Safe2Say Something tipline to report that students were AI-generating nude images of their peers, and another school in Washington that first learned about a nudify incident through a submission to the school’s harassment, intimidation, and bullying online tipline.
One provider of training to schools emphasized the importance of such reporting tools, saying, “Anonymous reporting tools are one of the most important things we can have in our school systems,” because many students lack a trusted adult they can turn to.
Notably, the report does not take a position on whether schools should educate students about nudify apps because “there are legitimate concerns that this instruction could inadvertently educate students about the existence of these apps.”
From 404 Media via this RSS feed
55
Inside the Discord Community Developing Its Own Hair Loss Drugs
(www.404media.co)
cross-posted from: https://rss.ponder.cat/post/193103
So, you’ve got a receding hairline in 2025. You could visit a dermatologist, sure, or you could try a new crop of websites that will deliver your choice of drugs on demand after a video call with a telehealth physician. There’s Rogaine and products from popular companies like Hims, or if you have an appetite for the experimental, you might find yourself at Anagen.
Anagen works a lot like Hims—some of its physicians have even worked there, according to their LinkedIn profiles and the Hims website—but take a closer look at the drugs on offer and you’ll start to notice the difference. Its Growth Maxi formula, which sells for $49.99 per month, contains Finasteride and Minoxidil; two drugs that are in Hims’ hair regrowth products. But it also contains Liothyronine, a thyroid medication also known as T3 that the Mayo Clinic warns may temporarily cause hair loss if taken orally. Keep reading and you’ll see Latanoprost, a glaucoma drug. Who came up with this stuff anyway?
The group behind the Anagen storefront and products it sells is HairDAO, a “decentralized autonomous organization” founded in 2023 by New York-based cryptocurrency investors Andrew Verbinnen and Andrew Bakst. HairDAO aims to harness the efforts of legions of online biohackers already trying to cure their hair loss with off-label drugs. Verbinnen and Bakst’s major innovation is to inject cash into this scenario: DAO participants are incentivized with crypto tokens they earn by contributing to research, or uploading blood work to an app.
DAOs have been a locus for some of the more out-there activities in the crypto space over the years. Not only are they vehicles for profit if their tokens appreciate in value, but token-holders vote on group decisions. This gives many DAOs an upstart, democratic flavor. For example, ConstitutionDAO infamously tried—and ultimately failed—to buy an original copy of the US Constitution and turn it into a financial asset. HairDAO exists in a subset of this culture called DeSci (decentralized science), which includes DAOs dedicated to funding research on everything from longevity to monetizing your DNA.
Depending on who you ask, it’s either the best thing to happen to hair loss research in decades, or far from it. “They're telling the world, hey, this works,” says a hair loss YouTuber who goes by KwRx and who has arguably been HairDAO’s loudest online critic. “It’s a recipe for disaster.”
HairDAO has turned self-experimentation by its DIY hair loss scientists into research being run in conjunction with people like Dr. Claire Higgins, a researcher at Imperial College London, as well as at its own lab. And, ultimately, into products sold via Anagen. It also sells an original shampoo formula called FolliCool for $49.95 per 200 ml bottle.
“The best hair loss researchers are basically anons on the internet,” Bakst said on a recent podcast appearance. “Of the four studies that we've run at universities, two of the four were fully designed by anons in our Discord server. And then, now that we have our own lab, all the studies we're running there are designed by anons in our Discord server.”
Dan, who asked to remain anonymous, is just another person on the internet trying to cure their hair loss. He’s experimented by adding melatonin to topical Minoxidil, he says, and he claims he has experienced “serious, lasting side effects” from Finasteride.
One day, he came across the HairDAO YouTube channel, where interviews with researchers like Dr. Ralf Paus from the University of Miami’s Miller School of Medicine immediately appealed to him.
“These were very interesting, offering deep insights into hair loss—much better than surface-level discussions you typically find on Reddit,” Dan says over Discord.
To him, it seemed like HairDAO brought a level of rigor to the freewheeling online world of DIY hair loss biohacking, where “group buys” of off-label drugs from overseas are a longstanding practice. If you’ve heard of the real-life Dallas Buyers Club of the 1980s, where AIDS patients pooled funds to buy experimental treatments, then you get the idea.
“People have become more skeptical and smarter about these things, realizing the importance of proper research, scientific methods, and evidence,” says Dan. “That’s where HairDAO comes in. I hope it succeeds because it could channel the energy behind the ‘biohacking’ spirit and transform it into something useful.”
There is no better example of this ideal than Jumpman, a pseudonymous researcher referred to in Hair Cuts, a digital magazine HairDAO publishes to update members on progress, as their “king,” “lead researcher,” “lord and savior,” and by Verbinnen as “the best hair loss researcher by a wide margin.” He earned thousands of crypto tokens with his contributions and is credited with pushing HairDAO to look at TWIST-1 and PAI-1, proteins that are implicated in different cancers, to search for new treatments that inhibit their expression.
One much-discussed drug is TM5441, a PAI-1 inhibitor that has been investigated to treat cancer as well as lowering blood pressure. It’s often called “TM” by Discord members.
“Bullish on TM,” Bakst says in a May 2023 Discord exchange.
“Yeah your blood may have trouble clotting,” he says, acknowledging the potential side effects. “Don't ride motorcycles if you're taking it haha.” Despite this, he’s engaged with users about how they should use it on themselves.
“I’d think it may be best to apply [TM] topically vs orally, just based on ability to target locally more frequently,” he says in an April 2024 Discord exchange with a user who was debating “upping the doses” of the drug, thinking it could be “a good hack.” Bakst added, “~not medical advice~.”
Discussion of group buys isn’t allowed in the HairDAO Discord. When one user brought up the topic in August last year, Verbinnen chimed in, “None of this here.” But one risk that comes with funding anonymous internet researchers experimenting with unproven drugs is that they might not play by the rules.
In messages pulled from a now-deleted Telegram channel seen by 404 Media, Jumpman discusses buying over half a kilogram of TM6541—another PAI-1 inhibitor—and says that the drug “will be ready in 6 weeks.” Jumpman also shares photos showing bags of pill bottles and says, “these are shipping out next week.” The labels on the bottles aren’t readable, and 404 Media can’t confirm if they actually shipped. Jumpman could not be reached for comment. It’s not clear whether the Telegram chat was officially linked to HairDAO, but it included HairDAO members other than Jumpman. In another Telegram message, a user says, “Guys, stop using TM, I found blood in the semen, after [several] tests, the doctor said it’s due to [blood pressure medications], careful.”
“Maybe you were taking too much TM to cause internal bleeding,” Jumpman responds.
Dan says this exchange didn’t worry him at the time. “The ‘blood in his semen’ thing happened to me once as well but I was not on any medications and [the] doctor told me it can happen sometimes and it’s not dangerous,” he says. “So I am hopeful that [the user] is alright, and that it resolved quickly, and that whatever he experimented with didn’t hurt him... does it concern or worry me personally? Not really because I don’t plan to use TM.”
Indeed, according to the Mayo Clinic, blood in semen—a condition known as hematospermia—most often goes away on its own, without any treatment. The Cleveland Clinic adds that it’s usually not a sign of a serious health problem and could be caused by a blood vessel bursting while masturbating, like blowing your nose too hard. Both organizations recommend consulting a doctor.
Jumpman may have actually been on to something with his focus on PAI-1 in particular. Douglas Vaughan is the director of the Potocsnak Longevity Institute at Northwestern University. PAI-1 inhibition is a longtime focus of his research. He has studied Amish populations in Indiana, for example, because of a mutation that inhibits PAI-1 and may protect against different effects of aging. He’s also investigated PAI-1, and TM5441, for hair loss—completely by accident.
“We were thinking, well, someday somebody's going to want to make a drug that blocks PAI-1. Why don't we make a mouse that makes too much of it?” Vaughan tells 404 Media. After engineering the mice, chock full of human PAI-1, he noticed something unexpected.
“Those mice were bald,” he says. He began working with Toshio Miyati, a professor at Tohoku University in Japan, who convinced Vaughan to try the drug TM5441 on the mice.
“He sent me a drug that was called TM5441, and we simply put it in the chow of our transgenic mice. We fed it to them for several weeks, and lo and behold, they started growing hair. I said, well, how about that?” he says.
But, he cautioned, people shouldn’t try TM5441 on themselves to cure their hair loss. “I think it’s foolish,” says Vaughan. “There are all kinds of reasons why you might take a drug or not, but usually you want to go through the regulatory steps to see that it's proven to be safe and effective.”
While TM has been much-discussed by HairDAO members, and it’s currently listed as a “treatment” on its online portal for people to discuss treatments and upload bloodwork, it isn’t named as a drug that HairDAO is formally investigating or sold to the public by Anagen. Vaugn says he was contacted by the group over a year ago, but a research partnership never materialized. Today, the group is pushing forward with investigating different drugs inhibiting TWIST-1 instead.
“In general, if you're an individual person and you're experimenting on yourself, that is frequently outside the scope of regulation,” says Patricia Zettler, an associate professor at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law who previously served as Deputy General Counsel to the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS).
“Where biohacking activities tend to intersect with existing regulatory regimes, whether at the federal level or the state level, is when people start giving drugs, selling drugs, or distributing drugs to other people,” she adds.
It’s unclear how much interaction HairDAO has had with regulatory bodies. Messages posted in Discord reference FDA consultants and gathering materials to submit to the agency.
Last year, the YouTuber KrWx created a series of videos and Substack posts airing his concerns with HairDAO’s DIY approach, generally labelling it dangerous and possibly illegal. He received a cease and desist letter from the group’s lawyers, seen by 404 Media, calling his claims false and defamatory. The merit of KrWx’s claims aside, his spotlight kicked off major shifts in the DAO’s Discord.
For one, Jumpman disappeared.
Andrew Bakst sits wearing a white lab coat, blue-gloved hands holding testing equipment. He looks at the camera. “PCR,” he says. “...PCR.” The cameraperson, a Discord user who uploaded the video in early April, laughs. “Got to repeat shit when we’re in the lab late at night.”
This New York-based lab space, opened in November, is where much of HairDAO’s latest work happens—already a far cry from the Jumpman era, just a few months after he vanished. The group is currently pursuing preclinical testing on three different protein targets and drugs, and claims to have filed for six patents. This work includes, for example, testing drugs on mouse skin.
“We also tested drug penetration on dry versus damp mouse skin,” Verbinnen wrote in an April Discord message, adding that "drugs penetrate damp skin much more than dry skin at least in the mouse model."
HairDAO has even run a human trial for T3, the thyroid drug that it sells via Anagen, involving six patients including Verbinnen and Bakst. In that trial, the participants were given a topical ointment to apply to their scalps, and the hair growth results were measured at the end of a year-long period. That research resulted in a preprint paper, which is available online.
“It is important to note that this study involved only six participants, which is a small sample size,” a disclaimer on the study included in an update for DAO members explains. “As such, we make no claims about the safety or efficacy of topical T3 based on these results.”
The Anagen listings for its T3 formulations promise “outstanding” and “maximum” results.
HairDAO conducts this work in collaboration with a handful of accredited researchers. The group says the T3 trial was “overseen” by Dr. Richard Powell, a Florida-based hair transplant surgeon whose name does not appear on the author list. Powell has close ties to HairDAO’s Chief Medical Officer, Dr. Blake Bloxham. The website for Powell’s practice says that it “exclusively uses in-house hair transplant technicians trained by Dr. Alan Feller and Dr. Blake Bloxham.” A 2023 YouTube video describes Powell as “part of Feller & Bloxham Medical.” An early draft of the T3 study design even indicates that both Powell and Bloxham would oversee it.
According to messages posted to Discord by the founders, Bloxham has a 49 percent stake in Anagen’s US operations. He’s even participated in the business side of expanding the service, such as by setting up corporate entities, according to Discord posts.
The T3 study discloses several conflicts of interest—including that HairDAO has filed a patent—but does not mention Powell or Bloxham, as they are not listed as study authors. When reached for comment over email, Bloxham initially said, “I’d love to answer any questions you have. In fact, I’d be happy to discuss HairDAO/Anagen in general; who we are, what we do, and why we do it. Pretty interesting stuff!” He did not respond to multiple follow-ups sent over email and Discord. In fact, none of HairDAO’s research collaborators contacted by 404 Media, including Powell, Paus, and Higgins, responded to requests for comment.
Verbinnen and Bakst did not respond to multiple requests for comment sent over email and Discord.
In the latest issue of Hair Cuts, HairDAO claims that Anagen earned $1,000 in its first two days of sales. As for its shampoo, FolliCool, it says that it has sold $29,000 worth of product. Meanwhile, its crypto token is worth roughly $25 a pop, down from a high of $150, with a market cap of over $16 million.
Its marketing costs to date? $0.
From 404 Media via this RSS feed
64
The sources provided by our wormy:
https://web.archive.org/web/20240409125822/http://www.xj.jcy.gov.cn/jwgk/gzbg/
it's in Chinese.
every province in China has a local government, so this is the local government of xinjiang.
it's very similar to having a state government in the US.
sorry, the articles only a few paragraphs along, try to read it a little more carefully.
or look for the older source that directly links to the protectorate, I have a lot of sources to provide.
you want the 2 million estimates?
here's one:
https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/china-xinjiang-uyghurs-muslims-repression-genocide-human-rights
Xinjiang High people's protectorate:
https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/09/14/china-xinjiang-official-figures-reveal-higher-prisoner-count
yes, of course.
the kidnappings and detentions are common knowledge in China and at this point affect nearly every part of the xinjiang population.
there's a pretty good report by the economist about the culture of fear, they interview uyghur exiles and family members of detainees:
148
Read Elias Rodriguez’s Leaked Chats
(www.kenklippenstein.com)
“I’m almost surprised you’re not antisemitic Elias,” a chat member once wrote. “It usually goes hand and hand [sic] with the whole Stalin did nothing wrong mantra,” alluding to Rodriguez’s support for old school communism.
“One of the biggest things that stalin [sic] didn’t do wrong was ending the most antisemitic regime ever yet known 2 man,” Rodriguez responded.
Still, when it came to race, Rodriquez’s hatred seemed reserved for white people.
“Lol you probably would have to actually genocide white people to make this a normal country,” Rodriguez wrote in one post. “Like even a very targeted and selective rehabilitation program would probably have to lead to the lifetime imprisonments of tens of millions of white people.”
👀 
In all his rage though, Rodriguez had an almost wide-eyed optimism about the global south, which as a self-identified Maoist Third Worldist, he believed alone had “revolutionary potential.”
19
cross-posted from: https://rss.ponder.cat/post/192040
For much of the 20th century, young Americans were seen as free speech’s fiercest defenders. But now, young Americans are growing more skeptical of free speech.
According to a March 2025 report by The Future of Free Speech, a nonpartisan think tank where I am executive director, support among 18- to 34-year-olds for allowing controversial or offensive speech has dropped sharply in recent years.
In 2021, 71% of young Americans said people should be allowed to insult the U.S. flag, which is a key indicator of support for free speech, no matter how distasteful. By 2024, that number had fallen to just 43% – a 28-point drop. Support for pro‑LGBTQ+ speech declined by 20 percentage points, and tolerance for speech that offends religious beliefs fell by 14 points.
This drop contributed to the U.S. having the third-largest decline in free speech support among the 33 countries that The Future of Free Speech surveyed – behind only Japan and Israel.
Why has this support diminished so dramatically?
Shift from past generations
In the 1960s, college students led what was called the free speech movement, demanding the right to speak freely about political matters on campus, often clashing with older, more censorious generations.
Sociologist Jean Twenge has tracked changes in attitudes using data from the General Social Survey, a biennial survey conducted by the University of Chicago’s National Opinion Research Center.
Since the 1970s, this survey has asked Americans whether controversial figures – racists, communists and anti-religionists – should be allowed to speak. Support for such rights generally increased from the Greatest Generation, born between 1900-1924, to Gen X, born between 1965-1979.
But Gen Z, those born between 1995-2004, has reversed that trend. Despite the fact that the Cold War, which pitted the communist Soviet Union and its allies against the democratic West, ended more than three decades ago, even support for the free speech rights of communists has declined.
Political drift and cultural realignment
At the same time, some data suggests that young Americans may be drifting rightward politically.
A Harvard Institute of Politics poll in late 2024 found that men ages 18–24 now identify as slightly more conservative than those ages 25–29. Another Gallup survey showed that Gen Z teens are twice as likely as Millennials to describe themselves as more conservative than their parents were at the same age.
This shift may help explain changes in speech attitudes.
Today’s young Americans may be less likely to instinctively defend speech aligned with liberal or progressive causes. For example, support among 18- to 29-year-olds for same-sex marriage, generally considered a liberal or progressive cause, fell from 79% in 2018 to 71% in 2022, according to Pew Research.
Attitudes toward hate speech
The Future of Free Speech study found that younger Americans are especially hesitant to defend speech that offends minority groups.
Only 47% of those ages 18 to 34 said such speech should be allowed, compared with 70% of those over 55.
Similarly, tolerance for religiously offensive speech was 57% among younger respondents, down from 71% in 2021.
This concern over harmful or bigoted speech is not new. A 2015 Pew survey found that 40% of millennials believed the government should be able to prevent offensive speech about minorities.
More recently, a 2024 report by the nonpartisan free speech advocacy group FIRE found that 70% of U.S. college students supported disinviting speakers perceived as bigoted. Over a quarter said violence could be acceptable to stop campus speech in some cases.
Broader implications
Why does this matter?
The First Amendment protects unpopular speech. It does not just shield offensive ideas, but it safeguards movements that once seemed fringe. Whether it’s civil rights, LGBTQ+ rights or anti-war protests, history shows that ideas seen as dangerous or radical in one era often become widely accepted in another.
Today’s younger Americans will soon shape policies in universities, media, government, tech and the public square. If a growing share believes speech should be regulated to prevent offense, that could signal a shift in how free speech is interpreted and enforced in American institutions.
To be sure, support for free speech in principle remains strong. The Future of Free Speech report found that 89% of Americans said people should be allowed to criticize government policy. But tolerance for more provocative or offensive speech appears to be eroding, especially among young people.
This raises questions about whether these changes reflect a life-stage effect − will today’s young people become more speech-tolerant as they age? Or are we seeing a deeper generational shift?
The data suggests Americans across all generations still value free speech. But for younger Americans, especially, that support seems increasingly conditional.
Jacob Mchangama is Research Professor of Political Science and Executive Director of The Future of Free Speech, Vanderbilt University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
From Techdirt via this RSS feed
view more: next ›