Controversial Reddit communities: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 05:58, 13 May 2025

Revision as of 05:00, 16 May 2025

Line 4:

{{Use mdy dates|date=October 2021}}

On the [[social news site]] [[Reddit]], some communities (known as ''[[subreddits]]'' or ''subs'') are centred around [[Sexually explicit content|explicit]], [[Graphic violence|violent]], [[Propaganda|propagandist]], or [[Online hate speech|hateful]] material. Many such subreddits have been the topic of controversy, at times receiving significant media coverage. [[Journalist]]s, [[Attorney at law|attorney]]s, [[Media studies|media researcher]]s, and others have commented that such communities shape and promote [[bias]]ed views of [[International relations|international politics]], the veracity of [[evidence-based medicine]], [[Misogyny|misogynistic]] rhetoric, and other disruptive{{vague|date=Marchsocially 2025}}disruptive concepts.

Contrary to popular opinion as well as previous staff practices and statements, the founders of Reddit have stated they did not intend the platform to be a "bastion of [[free speech]]", where even [[Online hate speech|hate speech]] would be tolerated.<ref name="bastion">{{cite web |last=Robertson |first=Adi |title=Was Reddit always about free speech? Yes, and no |url=https://www.theverge.com/2015/7/15/8964995/reddit-free-speech-history |website=The Verge |date=June 15, 2015 |access-date=September 22, 2021}}</ref> However, for a period of time, Reddit allowed these controversial communities to operate largely unrestricted. The site's General Manager, Erik Martin, has argued that objectionable material is a consequence of allowing free speech on the site.