Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Can’t Have It Both Ways: The Trouble With Reddit’s Content Policy Update

The site doesn’t want to offend free-speech diehards, but it also wants to tamp down harassment.

Robert Hyrons / Thinkstock

When new CEO Steve Huffman announced Reddit’s new rules for content three weeks ago, he attempted to make clear what’s acceptable to post on Reddit and what isn’t. Stuff that incites harassment or violence is off limits. Offensive and hateful speech, while deplorable, is not. That was that, or so we thought.

Huffman came in following the departure of CEO Ellen Pao, who was pilloried by members of the Reddit community for what they saw as arbitrary firing of beloved staffer Victoria Taylor, who coordinated the site’s popular Ask Me Anything posts. Huffman promised more transparency and proper empowerment of Redditors, who already hold immense sway over the site’s operations. Part of that effort included creating a revised content policy that would stand as an impartial guideline for how management makes decisions.

Today, Huffman published the formal content policy update, and confirmed the removal of some white supremacist and animated child pornography subreddits. The move reflects the harder line Reddit is taking against the seedier parts of the social news site, but it directly contradicts what Huffman said publicly on Reddit when the initial content announcement was made three weeks ago.

The updated content policy itself doesn’t really contain any new developments. Reddit previously said that venues like r/rapingwomen, concrete examples of subreddits that encourage harassing behavior, would no longer be tolerated. The company also said that really offensive subreddits (like, say, r/KikeTown) would be hidden behind a wall for casual Reddit users, a move that Reddit is calling “quarantining.

But accompanying the new policy was the revelation that r/coontown and some associated subreddits were now banned, despite earlier statements by Huffman that they would not be banned. The reason for the reversal? In a reply on Reddit, Huffman said it was because they “violate the spirit of the policy by making Reddit worse for everyone else.” Three weeks ago, Huffman specifically mentioned r/coontown as an example of something that was obviously offensive, but allowed to stay.

Huffman’s reasoning, predictably, didn’t elicit warm feelings from many on Reddit. It also raises questions about the point of such policy changes if the company is also comfortable making content decisions that conflict directly with previously stated policy.

To clarify why r/coontown specifically was banned, but r/KikeTown remains up, Reddit provided a statement to Re/code (that uses conspicuously similar language to another Huffman reply on Reddit): “We found ourselves spending a disproportionate amount of time dealing with [r/coontown] instead of working on Reddit itself, so this was a necessary shift for our team to maintain a healthy and successful platform.”

It makes sense that hosting what the Southern Poverty Law Center described as the nexus of white supremacism on the Internet makes it difficult to “maintain a healthy and successful platform.” It’s obvious that Reddit doesn’t want to play host to racism and harassment.

But the company doesn’t want to compromise too much on the “free speech” principles that hardcore Redditors, who are integral to the day-to-day functions of the site, obsess over. And Reddit also wants to cut ties with well-known hate centers like r/coontown that offend both advertisers and common decency.

Reddit’s problem is that it wants to have it both ways.

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

More in Technology

Technology
The case for AI realismThe case for AI realism
Technology

AI isn’t going to be the end of the world — no matter what this documentary sometimes argues.

By Shayna Korol
Politics
OpenAI’s oddly socialist, wildly hypocritical new economic agendaOpenAI’s oddly socialist, wildly hypocritical new economic agenda
Politics

The AI company released a set of highly progressive policy ideas. There’s just one small problem.

By Eric Levitz
Future Perfect
Human bodies aren’t ready to travel to Mars. Space medicine can help.Human bodies aren’t ready to travel to Mars. Space medicine can help.
Future Perfect

Protecting astronauts in space — and maybe even Mars — will help transform health on Earth.

By Shayna Korol
Podcasts
The importance of space toilets, explainedThe importance of space toilets, explained
Podcast
Podcasts

Houston, we have a plumbing problem.

By Peter Balonon-Rosen and Sean Rameswaram
Technology
What happened when they installed ChatGPT on a nuclear supercomputerWhat happened when they installed ChatGPT on a nuclear supercomputer
Technology

How they’re using AI at the lab that created the atom bomb.

By Joshua Keating
Future Perfect
Humanity’s return to the moon is a deeply religious missionHumanity’s return to the moon is a deeply religious mission
Future Perfect

Space barons like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk don’t seem religious. But their quest to colonize outer space is.

By Sigal Samuel