Online censorship is crushing indie webcomics
Posted by Tomte 6 hours ago
Comments
Comment by keiferski 4 hours ago
When you are mostly just shown content that you’ve agreed to see, there’s less of an issue when you see something that offends your particular sensibilities, values, etc. because you agreed to see it, or you went looking for it.
But when the potential content you’ll see can include literally anything, there is a real incentive for the platform to make that content as neutral as possible. Because if you’re shown something that you really don’t like, you’ll stop scrolling and the engagement stats will go down.
Comment by numpad0 1 hour ago
The problem, clearly, is that there are people who can't accept the public preference of contents. It's just that. They want ragebaits, politics, rich guys talking, whatever it is, to be more popular and influential than whatever being targeted this week. That is the root cause of this problem.
Comment by keiferski 26 minutes ago
I can imagine that some people don’t want to see extreme content, even briefly in order to train the algorithm. Hence the drive toward making all content neutral.
If I create a new Instagram account, and the first 5 things I see are various extreme things (of different "ideological stripes"), I'm closing the app, not waiting for the algorithm to adjust itself to me.
Comment by watwut 1 hour ago
Algorithm works, because it prevents people from consciously curating own feeds.
Comment by numpad0 28 minutes ago
Comment by iLoveOncall 3 hours ago
It's a shift from social media to entertainment media. Even Zuckerberg said it himself, his apps are NOT social media anymore.
Comment by anal_reactor 4 hours ago
Comment by pedrocr 4 hours ago
We're in bubbles everywhere now. Enforced by mods and payment processors and social networks. I'm now much more careful about what I post online. We don't have an actual public square to discuss things.
Comment by nephihaha 4 hours ago
I got shadow banned on Duolingo forums for questioning why a billion dollar company was not paying some of the people who helped develop their language courses.
Comment by numpad0 12 minutes ago
Comment by walrus01 4 hours ago
Comment by puppymaster 2 hours ago
Comment by 46283737292 2 minutes ago
How terribly oppressed you are!
Comment by Black616Angel 5 hours ago
Comment by Ygg2 5 hours ago
Comment by kotaKat 5 hours ago
I didn't know you could get arrested for possessing a half ounce of blur, but here we are in 2026.
Comment by gambiting 5 hours ago
Comment by Ygg2 5 hours ago
Comment by roenxi 4 hours ago
It is an interesting use case to monitor because there are obvious need for something like crypto, but so that has not come close to taking hold.
Comment by gambiting 3 hours ago
Because on both TikTok and Instagram people don't actively choose(most of the time) what they want to watch. The algorithm chooses for them. So if you're a content creator and you self censor yourself then you're making it more likely the algorithm will pick you, because they can show ads around your content. They will say they aren't censoring because the other videos are not technically banned, but no content creator wants to be skipped by the algorithm.
Comment by wtch98 4 hours ago
https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w24452/w244...
Comment by Ygg2 3 hours ago
It takes a lot to get your own attrocites page on Wikipedia
Comment by walrus01 4 hours ago
the advertising industry in general is a plague on a great many things, in the current instance of late stage capitalism we exist in.
Comment by jesse_dot_id 2 hours ago
Comment by expedition32 4 hours ago
I live in the Netherlands- a country that prises itself in hyper individuality. It can be a little tiring but never boring. People here are born without filters. Cold, blunt, callous, rude, insulting but always free.
Comment by 46283737292 4 minutes ago
Comment by charbroiled 1 hour ago
What countries remove books from the store if you say “Free Palestine”?
Comment by whoanoway 4 hours ago
Comment by OgsyedIE 4 hours ago
Comment by torben-friis 4 hours ago
Comment by magackame 4 hours ago
If only crypto was actually used as intended...
I do wonder how easy is it for buisnesses, that only accept crypto (lets say monero), to turn it back into fiat, and how willing are regular people to set up and acquire crypto to pay.
Comment by numpad0 2 hours ago
Comment by xboxnolifes 1 hour ago
Comment by alexgieg 4 hours ago
As for a universal social media platform, that used to exist. It was called "webrings". Every website would link to other websites they vouched for, so you could browse around them, and sign up for those you liked by clicking a single button on your browser of choice, adding it to your RSS feeds, after which you'd be notified whenever a creator you subscribed to posted something new.
Most of that died when Google decided to oppose RSS as a public-facing feature, and pressured Firefox in doing the same. So nowadays it suffers from the same networking effects problem crypto does.
The whole thing is deliberately engineered to centralize decision-making in the hands of as few people as possible, aka elites, and, through that, to steer most of the masses in whatever direction most benefits those elites.
Comment by PostOnce 5 hours ago
Comment by atomicfiredoll 5 hours ago
I was initially going to check and see if they had any presence on the Fediverse. While it doesn't solve the payment processor issues at the moment, I think web comics could find an audience there with less threat of censorship, albeit a smaller one.
Comment by makeitdouble 4 hours ago
As I understand it, money is the core of it. Everything else would be accessory if the payment processor part got solved.
Comment by Black616Angel 5 hours ago
If only every third NSFW-artist from tumble migrated into the fediverse, the audience would follow and maybe even lead some of the other artists to join as well.
Comment by yorwba 4 hours ago
The usual solution is to put conspicuous censorship markers over everything the platform finds objectionable and then let the audience know where they can buy the uncensored edition.
Comment by atomicfiredoll 5 hours ago
Comment by numpad0 4 hours ago
Same almost happened with Bluesky later at much smaller scale due to skepticism and again moderation happened.
That's why Twitter reigns supreme.
Comment by atomicfiredoll 2 hours ago
Mastodon isn't the entirety of the Fediverse and is decentralized, so artists can just start create their own instance if they really need to. But, there are actually already multiple art related instances, like mastodon.art.
Comment by mschuster91 4 hours ago
... and at least a fair few fediverse instances, especially ones based in Europe, would defederate with NSFW friendly instances in order to stay compliant with relevant laws.
Comment by fwn 3 hours ago
Even in the extreme, theoretical case of full defederation you could just browse your communities by having a sperate account on every relevant server using a multi-account client.
It also reduces the impact if you lose an account: Since they are all single-purpose, you can easily create a new one replacing the one you lost.
Comment by iamnothere 29 minutes ago
Comment by numpad0 1 hour ago
(or 20x more statuses and 2.5x more users relative to baraag, FWIW)
Comment by thaumasiotes 4 hours ago
Comment by atomicfiredoll 4 hours ago
> La tienda en línea ha sido suspendida momentáneamente
> Si es tuya y quieres reactivarla, entra a tu Administrador Nube.
> ---
> The online store has been momentarily suspended
> If it's yours and you want to reactivate it, go to your Cloud Manager.
Edit: I'm assuming they were using some kind of site builder with ecommerce functionality, I know that some small creators use their site at least in part for merch, sometimes entirely.
Comment by yorwba 4 hours ago
Comment by atomicfiredoll 4 hours ago
> "Hazel (the artist) and Bell (the writer) are an English-speaking duo behind the webcomics "Electric Bones" and "Always Raining Here". "Always Raining Here" is a Canadian slice of life romance published in 2025 by First Second books and is now available in bookstores across Canada. Hazel and Bell have been working together since 2011, with a focus on telling stories set in their home province of British Columbia."
I wonder if it's something region specific.
Comment by jeroenhd 3 hours ago
I've never seen someone actually get blocked on Bluesky, but post filters do block things the Puritan American media would dislike by default. Blowing people up is fine but nipples aren't, same with any social media site, really.
Payment processors getting into the whole thing is gross, though. I wish cryptocurrency was good for more than just speculation, gifting, and crime. Maybe when the mythical Digital Euro comes, which is supposed to be a self-managed cryptocurrency wallet system tied to real money, we'll be able to get over Mastercard and Visa.
Comment by GaryBluto 5 hours ago
The only thing that actually seems to be an issue here is the credit card processors.
Comment by nkrisc 4 hours ago
Comment by mcherm 4 hours ago
That leaves two key issues: getting paid, and discovery.
Getting paid (at a minimum, enough to cover hosting bandwidth and art supplies, but I like to dream some artists earn at least a tiny bit from their work) works now but is VERY fragile. Just a couple of vendors offer mostly-not-censored payment services (eg: Patreon) and if they stopped due to pressure from credit card networks, governments, or billionaires it would be difficult to replace them.
As for discovery, we need to build platforms that aren't the major social networks that can help audiences find new comics. This is a fairly easy problem to solve.
Comment by nephihaha 4 hours ago
Comment by Ekaros 5 hours ago
Comment by throwawayfifo 2 hours ago
Comment by tclancy 2 hours ago
Comment by charlieyu1 2 hours ago
Comment by ThrowawayTestr 2 hours ago
Comment by tclancy 2 hours ago
Comment by throwawayfifo 2 hours ago
Comment by ThrowawayTestr 1 hour ago
Comment by brador 2 hours ago
Comment by nonameiguess 2 hours ago
What is it people actually want? If you want to be able to create anything whatsoever legal and get paid to sell it, you can do that. If you want it to be as easy and controversy and bureacracy free as putting today's stock prices and last night's sports scores on a public ticker screen in Times Square where ten million eyeballs a day can see it without specifically asking for it, sorry, I don't think that's happening.
Comment by lelanthran 1 hour ago
They want their specific content shown to as many people as possible. They don't want to have their content limited to over-18 or NSFW websites.
The thing is, I think that the content-hosting platforms' broad "NSFW content is not welcome" rules is great. While I may not object to seeing a male nipple pop up in my feed, I won't object if male nipples never pop up either.
It is working the way I want it to, but it sounds to me that the complaint is that I should at least see this type of content occasionally even if I don't seek it out, which seems completely bonkers to me.
Comment by kitku 2 hours ago
Comment by lelanthran 1 hour ago
And we didn't; I clicked the link and saw exactly what you said we have to go to Pornhub to see. What's the problem here?
Comment by Apreche 2 hours ago
If you want the reach of a big platform, comply with their TOS. To the extent possible use the big platforms to steer people to your normal web site where your uncensored content is. This isn’t hard.
Comment by jmspamerton 1 hour ago
Comment by allarm 5 hours ago
Comment by GaryBluto 4 hours ago
Comment by throwawayfifo 3 hours ago
Is there something wrong with commenting a factual statement? This is objectively not censorship.
Comment by Black616Angel 5 hours ago
Coincidence? I think not.
Comment by gambiting 5 hours ago
Comment by nkrisc 4 hours ago
Comment by Cthulhu_ 4 hours ago
Comment by lelanthran 1 hour ago
Okay, then who gets to decide that? If platforms cannot advertise as child-friendly, they are dead in the water. Now who do you propose gets to decide which platforms are child-friendly and which are not?
Comment by GaryBluto 4 hours ago
Comment by makeitdouble 4 hours ago
> restrictions from payment providers are making sharing queer stories online even harder.
Comment by nkrisc 4 hours ago
But along with that, if they are making decisions, they should be held to account for what they do allow.
Comment by 1317 4 hours ago
Comment by xg15 4 hours ago
Comment by nephihaha 4 hours ago
Comment by mschuster91 4 hours ago
I don't want to see furry smut either, but for fucks sake I think that everyone should be able to pay money to their favorite furry smut artists if they want to. Credit card processors should only be allowed to refuse transactions if they actively break a law.
Comment by nkrisc 4 hours ago
Other than that though, I think platforms should be free to ban smut if they want. I’ve abandoned several sites over time because they became inundated with cartoon smut, which I am not interested in.
Comment by barbafant 3 hours ago
Would a good filtering options, defaulted to SFW be enough for you? That it what I think should be the norm for content hosting platforms.
Comment by mschuster91 4 hours ago
While I agree on principle, I also see the dangers of platforms caving before Evangelical pressure campaigns. And once this is established, the threshold to cross from "ban furry smut" to "ban anything even smelling like LGBT" is much much thinner. My personal patience with and trust in platforms to behave sanely is all but gone.
Comment by nottorp 4 hours ago
And if you do comics that size, please think of the poor laptop/desktop users and lay out more on one line...
Comment by xiphias2 4 hours ago
School libraries were always censored heavily.
Using online payment processing for censoring is a separate issue that unfortunately comes up heavily (money is supposed to be neutral as long as its used legally), but they shouldn't be mixed together with the school library question.
Comment by yorwba 4 hours ago
Comment by big_hacker 4 hours ago
What if there was a massage parlor downstairs, perfectly legal and allowed, which marketed and sent wealthy patrons upstairs?
But whatever. Aside from the slippery slope argument of OnlyFans which I guess can be dispelled, I think using the raccoons for broader appeal and calling porn "queer" is poor.
Even less popular: I think there's a simple business argument to credit card companies and regulating porn. The sector has way higher fraud, disputes and chargebacks.