It depends on whether the parties to the communication want that or not.
So let's say a few child molesters create a chat service and use it to send the worst, most horrible child pornography amongst themselves. Removing it is censorship, not moderation.
Look, I'm not trying argue for legalization of child pornography here. That is illegal contraband, full stop. The intent of my comment is to say "let's just call it what it is"
I think the overwhelming consensus is that child pornography is so horrible that mere possession of it must be CENSORED.
I'm not arguing that censorship is always wrong. For instance, I don't want to see public billboards of graphic sex or violence. I think it's good that we censor that, so that we aren't forced to look at things like that when we don't want to.
What is bothering me is that proponents of censorship, and especially certain proponents of it who want to use it as a tool to suppress ideas they don't like, have recently started using the word "moderation" in order to sneak their plans into policy without raising objections. The reason is because when we hear the word "censorship" we immediately think, "Whoa, hold on there, censorship is very harsh, let's take a hard look and make sure this is serious enough that resorting to censorship is justified and appropriate", whereas when we hear the word "moderation" we think, "Of course, we all appreciate someone deleting the spam and trolls who annoy us", and we're less likely to think critically about exactly what kind of expression is being legally prohibited.
It depends on whether the parties to the communication want that or not.
So let's say a few child molesters create a chat service and use it to send the worst, most horrible child pornography amongst themselves. Removing it is censorship, not moderation.
Look, I'm not trying argue for legalization of child pornography here. That is illegal contraband, full stop. The intent of my comment is to say "let's just call it what it is"
I think the overwhelming consensus is that child pornography is so horrible that mere possession of it must be CENSORED.
I'm not arguing that censorship is always wrong. For instance, I don't want to see public billboards of graphic sex or violence. I think it's good that we censor that, so that we aren't forced to look at things like that when we don't want to.
What is bothering me is that proponents of censorship, and especially certain proponents of it who want to use it as a tool to suppress ideas they don't like, have recently started using the word "moderation" in order to sneak their plans into policy without raising objections. The reason is because when we hear the word "censorship" we immediately think, "Whoa, hold on there, censorship is very harsh, let's take a hard look and make sure this is serious enough that resorting to censorship is justified and appropriate", whereas when we hear the word "moderation" we think, "Of course, we all appreciate someone deleting the spam and trolls who annoy us", and we're less likely to think critically about exactly what kind of expression is being legally prohibited.