I just want social media to end already. The centralization of internet content into the hands of 3-4 gatekeepers has been terrible for quality and independent thought.
Blocking social media on my networks has made this so evident. There's SO much news and information silo'd off on just a handful of platforms it's insane.
I haven't blocked Reddit yet, but I feel that would basically set me back to the stone ages.
I miss the days when almost every website was run by a single person
Why is this important? How about NGOs?
[deleted]
So you should support Mastodon and ActivityPub.
I support investing socially in the real world and my community
Internet makes the communication across large distances much easier and can't be replaced by personal communication.
The internet != social media
How else are you suggesting to participate in large communities?
Can nostr be a good alternative too?
Its not "Abortion" itself being censored, rather gray market indian pharmaceutical companies. There is a huge market of third world pharma producers who create anything from modafinil to viagra and sell these prescription-only drugs on the open web. Their host countries do not prosecute, and the only reason the business works is that no country can check every single package that enters it. Anyone dedicated enough can find these marketplaces and order alot of useful medication, and in general i believe that drugs should be largely decriminalized and easily accessible, but that doesnt mean the potential customers themselves should be 'accessible' as well.
Putting any vital information on social media platforms was/is a poor idea.
Putting it on government websites isn’t proving to be much safer either.
Nobody looks at government websites.
Speak for yourself, I routinely look at the cdc for health guidelines because it's orders of magnitude better than whatever SEO garbage normally shows up. Also the National Hurricane Center website for updates.
If I'm in the UK and have a health issue, I absolutely look at the NHS website which is full of clear, pragmatic, accurate advice
Nurses and the professionals who keep you healthy and safe rely on these websites. Just because you personably do not, does not mean you aren’t directly benefiting from their existence.
Ii basically only look at government websites in matters of health.
> over the past several years,
Not, say, in the past few months?
> there has been a sharp increase in reports of social media platforms removing or suppressing abortion-related content, even when no law requires platforms to do so
What platforms? What abortion-related content?
> What platforms? What abortion-related content?
Did you try skimming some of the references on the linked page?
> Reporting and Research
> Instagram and Facebook Blocked and Hid Abortion Pill Providers’ Posts (New York Times)
> Obstacles to Autonomy: Post-Roe Removal of Abortion Information Online (Amnesty International
There's also a reference to a site called Repro Uncensored [2]. Another click brought me to "Amnesty International USA x Plan C x WFD: How Abortion Information is Restricted Online" [3].
> Did you try skimming some of the references on the linked page?
I honestly missed them. So, it seems to be TikTok and Facebook (including Instagram) removing abortion-related things (not very precisely defined) after the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Which seems on its face somewhat reasonable; if something is no longer universally legal in all states, it might be categorized in with other things not nationally legal, and treated the same.
Anything I see on social media requires a fact check on a "legitimate" site. I don't even trust the random historical facts that pop up which are inconsequential. It's a sad state that anyone is actually using important health information from these sources.
I find the phrase “reproductive health” a terrible euphemism.
Truth be told, the linked Bluesky post is direct in wording.
What would you prefer?
Abortion is literally the opposite of reproduction, so I agree it’s an inappropriate euphemism.
I see, you have trouble interpreting the -ive suffix.
I just want social media to end already. The centralization of internet content into the hands of 3-4 gatekeepers has been terrible for quality and independent thought.
Blocking social media on my networks has made this so evident. There's SO much news and information silo'd off on just a handful of platforms it's insane.
I haven't blocked Reddit yet, but I feel that would basically set me back to the stone ages.
I miss the days when almost every website was run by a single person
Why is this important? How about NGOs?
So you should support Mastodon and ActivityPub.
I support investing socially in the real world and my community
Internet makes the communication across large distances much easier and can't be replaced by personal communication.
The internet != social media
How else are you suggesting to participate in large communities?
Can nostr be a good alternative too?
Its not "Abortion" itself being censored, rather gray market indian pharmaceutical companies. There is a huge market of third world pharma producers who create anything from modafinil to viagra and sell these prescription-only drugs on the open web. Their host countries do not prosecute, and the only reason the business works is that no country can check every single package that enters it. Anyone dedicated enough can find these marketplaces and order alot of useful medication, and in general i believe that drugs should be largely decriminalized and easily accessible, but that doesnt mean the potential customers themselves should be 'accessible' as well.
The direct EFF url:
https://www.eff.org/pages/stop-censoring-abortion
Putting any vital information on social media platforms was/is a poor idea.
Putting it on government websites isn’t proving to be much safer either.
Nobody looks at government websites.
Speak for yourself, I routinely look at the cdc for health guidelines because it's orders of magnitude better than whatever SEO garbage normally shows up. Also the National Hurricane Center website for updates.
If I'm in the UK and have a health issue, I absolutely look at the NHS website which is full of clear, pragmatic, accurate advice
Nurses and the professionals who keep you healthy and safe rely on these websites. Just because you personably do not, does not mean you aren’t directly benefiting from their existence.
Ii basically only look at government websites in matters of health.
> over the past several years,
Not, say, in the past few months?
> there has been a sharp increase in reports of social media platforms removing or suppressing abortion-related content, even when no law requires platforms to do so
What platforms? What abortion-related content?
> What platforms? What abortion-related content?
Did you try skimming some of the references on the linked page?
> Reporting and Research
> Instagram and Facebook Blocked and Hid Abortion Pill Providers’ Posts (New York Times)
> TikTok Keeps Removing Abortion Pill Content (WIRED)
> Obstacles to Autonomy: Post-Roe Removal of Abortion Information Online (Amnesty International
There's also a reference to a site called Repro Uncensored [2]. Another click brought me to "Amnesty International USA x Plan C x WFD: How Abortion Information is Restricted Online" [3].
[1] https://www.eff.org/pages/stop-censoring-abortion
[2] https://www.reprouncensored.org/
[3] https://www.reprouncensored.org/research/abortion-restricted
> Did you try skimming some of the references on the linked page?
I honestly missed them. So, it seems to be TikTok and Facebook (including Instagram) removing abortion-related things (not very precisely defined) after the overturn of Roe v. Wade. Which seems on its face somewhat reasonable; if something is no longer universally legal in all states, it might be categorized in with other things not nationally legal, and treated the same.
Anything I see on social media requires a fact check on a "legitimate" site. I don't even trust the random historical facts that pop up which are inconsequential. It's a sad state that anyone is actually using important health information from these sources.
I find the phrase “reproductive health” a terrible euphemism.
Truth be told, the linked Bluesky post is direct in wording.
What would you prefer?
Abortion is literally the opposite of reproduction, so I agree it’s an inappropriate euphemism.
I see, you have trouble interpreting the -ive suffix.
Maybe this helps:
https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/-ive
Weird brigading in here
Maybe, maybe not. Wish we could get actual insight into how extensive online propaganda is in 2025. I genuinely think it's reaching 30-50% of comments