LiveJournal sold to Russian Company SUP Fabrik

[cold_starlight]

I will not repeat the news, as I am sure everybody already knows it. I want to say, however, that in Russian segment of LJ (which is second biggest after English) there is a strong opinion that the deal was planned to come through exactly after the parliamentary elections in Russia, so all the Russian blogosphere would discuss the fact of sale of

Comments

[andy]

I am a SUP employee, but I would like to say a couple of words not as a representative, but as a regular LiveJournal user. I am currently unsure which is our official position regarding such concerns (and actually responding to feedback in English-language communities is outside of my scope), so.

First, I want to describe a little fact the people around here who don't know Russian may not be aware of: trolls are more willing to explain their opinion than the most of the users. This is, regular users can just perceive all this situation in the way of "lolwut, SUP bought LJ? okay, this changes nothing" or similar, without expressing any feedback and furthermore going to no_lj_ads to make you aware of their feelings. This is natural, you know

[sushis]

I'm uncertain why I should take your opinion, that the majority of Russian LJ-users who comment against SUP are "trolls" to be the truth.

By way of analogy: I am an American citizen, living in America. I have been unhappy with many of LJ's recent actions, prior to the purchase of LJ by SUP. I have complained about these actions on news along with many other English-speaking users who feel the same way as I do. We complain because we feel we have legitimate grievances about LJ's treatment of its users. We are not "trolls" for the most part.

Why should I take your word for it that the Russians who complain about SUP do not have legitimate complaint, just as the Americans/U.K./Canadians who have complained had legitimate complaints about LJ when it was with Six Apart?

[dabroots]

Agreed. That only days after it slipped in a bit of news about Adult Content banners, flagging, etc., Live Journal announces it's been purchased by a company in Vladimir Putin's Russia seems unreal. But it's very real, and I'm not feeling great about it.

[andy]

Obvious things: Adult Content nags are not a censorship if they are used as intended, and flagging is basically just an easier way to get in touch with the Abuse Prevention Team, which existed way, way before SUP was established.

[dabroots]

They intimidate bloggers into both censoring their own posts and into slapping Adult Content designations on their own journals. Censorship is encouraged and accomplished.
Fear that their journals might be flagged by others cause them to go ahead and do it, themselves.

[andy]

This is not about censorship, it's about teenagers seeing tits, which was discouraged anyway.

[dabroots]

In LJ's note to account holders days before the SUP announcement, no mention was made of graphic porn being the problem. Way too many people on my own F list have put that designation onto their own journals simply because they occasionally post text that includes four-letter words and sometimes talk about sex in their posts.

[zoarazul]

If we could rewind to, say, two weeks ago, and if someone had asked me w/not I considered my writing to be "adult content/concepts," I would have said yes. It's written by an adult for a very small group of other adults (effectively, since 95% of my posts are f-locked these days).

My LJ cursing is a mere fraction of my real-life cursing, and there are way more salacious images of me over on FB, so I wasn't thinking "shit, fuck, here's a picture of me topless" when I slapped that label on my own LJ. Of course, two weeks ago, I didn't *have* to make that choice ... but that's the choice I'd have made then, and the choice I chose to make now. Or, well, a couple of days ago.

But honestly, mostly I did it so I didn't have to keep seeing that stupid "may contain" warning, and so I wouldn't inflict that on others. Because I am a LAZY adult, you see.

[janinedog]

If they're setting their own journals as having adult content, it's not censorship. That's simply the journal owner making a choice about who can see their content.

[dabroots]

It's self-censorship initiated in response to what's basically an "or else risk getting flagged by your fellow account holders" message from LJ headquarters.

[janinedog]

In the specific cases you mentioned (cursing and talking about sex), these would most likely be "adult concepts", which isn't something the Abuse Prevention Team can even mark on a journal (users can only mark their own journals as "adult concepts"). So if that's what they're writing about, they have nothing to worry about. Even if enough users do flag their content, more than likely nothing would come of it.

I also want to point out that as long as the content isn't illegal under US law, the worst that can happen is that users under 18 won't be able to view that content (and that only happens in the case of "explicit" adult content, such as pornography). And again, nothing happens at all until the Abuse Prevention Team reviews it and makes a decision.

[dabroots]

When you say "explicit" adult content, are you referring only to images, such as photos and videos? Are you totally excluding anything that's written? If LJ's definition of "Adult Oriented Content" does not include writing, they should make that clear in their official statements to account holders. Many people started slapping that label on their journals only in the past week, only when that official statement about putting labels on our journals was posted by the Live Journal office. Encouraging us to have that label showing in front of our journals before anyone has even had a chance to look at them to know what's there, is a form of intimidation and, in turn, censorship.

[janinedog]

I'm not a part of determining what is and isn't adult content (that's the Abuse Prevention Team's job), so you may wish to contact them if you'd like some clarification, though I don't know that they can give much without specific examples.

This is the definition of explicit adult content that was posted in lj_biz"Content that is graphic and explicit (depicting nudity, sexuality, or violence) that is appropriate only for adults and is not suitable for anyone under the age of 18. This label does not imply that the content is considered obscene, just that it is not appropriate for minors

[_lethe_]

Agreed!

[ex_uniquewo]

Self-censorship would be users *not* posting potentially offending/explicit content. Self-censorship does not mean limiting the access to adults/older teens. Or do you call friends-locking self-censorship too?

I have labeled my journal as containing adult explicit content - no matter how explicit or non-explicit its content actually is - because I don't want kids whining about reading/seeing stuff there were not supposed to see. It won't stop me from saying/showing whatever I want to show/say so I'm not self-censuring myself in any way. This hasn't limited my freedom of speech. Has it limited yours?

[mskala]

Discouraging teenagers from seeing tits is censorship.