Substack Stands Strong Against Left’s Anti-Free Speech Pressure

Substack’s leaders responded to the leftist pressure for censorship with strong defenses of freedom of speech. “I wouldn’t want someone to pick out my clothes for me, much less my ideas,” Substack executive Lulu Cheng Meservey said.

The Washington PostSubstack was attacked in an absurd piece. The Post accused the platform of being “a hub for controversial and often misleading perspectives about the coronavirus.” Yahoo! News, The Guardian and The Daily Beast also supported Substack, citing The Center for Countering Digital Hate. Vice-chair of Leftist Clinton Foundation Chelsea ClintonAlso complained about “Anti-vaxx grift going strong” on Substack. Substack reacted by standing strong for freedom of speech. “At Substack, we don’t make moderation decisions based on public pressure or PR considerations,” tweeted Substack Vice President of Communications Meservey, according to Fox News. “An important principle for us is defending free expression, even for stuff we personally dislike or disagree with. We understand principles come at a cost.” 

Meservey said she was “proud” of this free speech stance, and that “open debate is not always comfortable,” but it is necessary. “Who should be the arbiter of what’s true and good and right?” Meservey asked. She noted no generation is “infallible.” Meservey pointed out a key issue with Big Tech censorship: “People should be allowed to decide for themselves, not have a tech executive decide for them.”

Substack has been created as a platform that allows people to express their opinions, even controversial ones. “While we have content guidelines that allow us to protect the platform at the extremes, we will always view censorship as a last resort, because we believe open discourse is better for writers and better for society,” wrote SubStack co-founders Chris Best, Hamish McKenzie, and Jairaj. The Substack co-founders said that America is suffering from an “epidemic of mistrust” in social media and other institutions, and that the “consequences are profound.” The co-founders insisted, “More censorship will only make it worse.”

Substack’s critics have a clear political bias. The Post cited the leftist Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) to claim Substack “makes millions of dollars off anti-vaccine misinformation.” The CCDH asserted Substack makes “$2.5 million in revenue from anti-vaccine newsletters per year.” Dr. Joseph Mercola, who turned to Substack after being censored by Big Tech, was specifically slammed. 

The PostMercola was mocked for predicting that unvaccinated Americans could soon find themselves in quarantine camps run by the government. Australia has reportedly been using its military to move COVID-19-positive citizens to “quarantine camps.” 

However, the CCDH’s biases have been proven in the past. CCDH dishonestly labeled nine sites, including Breitbart and Media Research Center, as part of a so-called “Toxic Ten” of “climate change denial.”

Conservatives under attack. Your representatives should be contacted to demand free speech. Tech giants must provide equal access to their users as provided in the First Amendment. If you have been censored, contact us using CensorTrack’s Contact formPlease help us make Big Tech more accountable.

About Post Author

Follow Us