Silicon Values: The Future of Free Speech Under Surveillance Capitalism

by Jillian York

How Google, Facebook and Amazon threaten our Democracy

What is the impact of surveillance capitalism on our right to free speech? The Internet once promised to be a place of extraordinary freedom beyond the control of money or politics, but today corporations and platforms exercise more control over our ability to access information and share knowledge to a greater extent than any state. From the online calls to arms in the thick of the Arab Spring to the contemporary front line of misinformation, Jillian York charts the war over our digital rights. She looks at both how the big corporations have become unaccountable censors, and the devastating impact it has had on those who have been censored.

In Silicon Values, leading campaigner Jillian York, looks at how our rights have become increasingly undermined by the major corporations desire to harvest our personal data and turn it into profit. She also looks at how governments have used the same technology to monitor citizens and threatened our ability to communicate. As a result our daily lives, and private thoughts, are being policed in an unprecedented manner. Who decides the difference between political debate and hate speech? How does this impact on our identity, our ability to create communities and to protest? Who regulates the censors? In response to this threat to our democracy, York proposes a user-powered movement against the platforms that demands change and a new form of ownership over our own data.

Genres: Technology, Nonfiction, Politics, Business, Internet, Social Justice, Society

288 pages, Kindle Edition

First published March 2, 2021

About the author

Jillian C. York is a writer whose work has been published in a number of publications, including The New York Times, Motherboard, The Washington Post, Die Zeit, The Conversationalist, and Buzzfeed.

Reviews

[Dave · Rating 2 out of 5]

At times “ Silicon Values” is an interesting treatise on the how power has become concentrated in the hands of a few Silicon Valley elites and how these companies have ended up working with governments around the world to censor opinion and information. Unfortunately, the treatise later descends into a series of ad hominem attacks on Israel (equating Zionism with Marxism, for example) and a lot of inside chatter about events in Libya and Egypt minus context. If you are looking for a straightforward analysis of Big Tech and censorship, this book simply loses its focus.

[Ruslan · Rating 4 out of 5]

This will be difficult to read for many. I can assume that there will be criticism about the political part of the book, but I understand why Jillian York put these examples. Yes, censorship, politics, geopolitics, economic interests are often intertwined, and the book shows how this is reflected. I know the author from her time in Global Voices and I can say that she is one of the few experts in the field who know exactly what they are talking about. The book is worth reading, even if you disagree with some of the theses.

[Cav · Rating 1 out of 5]

Silicon Values fields a timely subject matter, but sadly, Jillian York's telling of this story left much to be desired for me...

Author Jillian C. York is a writer whose work has been published in a number of publications, including The New York Times, Motherboard, The Washington Post, Die Zeit, The Conversationalist, and Buzzfeed.

Jillian York:



For a book about social media, the internet and free speech, there was an overwhelming torrent of superfluous, hyper-partisan leftist speech, jargon and rhetoric in here. Early alarm bells triggered for me when York repeatedly refers to black people only as "marginalized", and makes many snide remarks about white men, and men in general. She also manages to include many disparaging remarks about Israel somehow, as well as drops many other irrelevant snark little partisan asides throughout the book.
York describes the deaths of Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown in a politically charged manner; calling the shooting of Martin a "particular act of brutality". "...another young unarmed Black man named Michael Brown was killed by a police officer" is how she describes the death of Michael Brown.

Aside from both of the above statements being overtly dishonest and slippery appeals to emotion, I'm not sure why they (or the many comments about "white men") were even included in this book in the first place... They were not at all relevant to the broader story here. Indeed, the addition of ridiculous partisan rhetoric like this is usually a good barometer to the degree of the author's ideological possession.
I don't know why authors who are naked partisans think others will appreciate their shit political takes being inserted where they are not even relevant. Absolutely terrible...

There is a somewhat ridiculous chapter about the efforts to censor sex, sex workers and pornography from social media sites. She seemingly can't wrap her head around why platforms that are used by children would want to censor those things. LMAO. Ok, then...
She then laments: "I cannot help but think about what was lost when the Nazis seized power, decimating the freedoms that had flourished in the Weimar Republic..." The naive reader might want to do some reading on the excesses of Weimar Germany to get an appreciation of what was "lost": widespread sexual promiscuity, prostitution (including child prostitution), books about pedophilia and bestiality, drug abuse, and general lax and deviant moral standards were all commonplace in Weimar Germany. Whether the destruction of these things constitutes a "loss" I guess depends on your moral compass...
York also assumes that the above qualities would of course be objectively "good" for the long-term health and prosperity of any society. Ridiculous "reasoning".
Also not realized by the author, apparently, is that the very same culture described above produced a strong backlash; contributing to a right-wing strongman like Adolph Hitler coming to power in the first place.

York repeatedly mentions the rise of right-wing extremism and the "far-right" here, but doesn't once mention the danger of the rise of self-described Communists, Anarchists, and other assorted far-leftist groups who hold staunchly anti-Western, anti-American and anti-police sentiments, or the ~6+ months of rioting, burning, looting and associated murders by those same groups, that destroyed large swaths of numerous American cities in the summer of 2020.
She dismisses the politically motivated censorship of conservative voices as no more than an irrelevant fairy tale, concocted by those on the "far-right". Imagine being so oblivious...

The book started off OK, but then got progressively worse as it went; culminating in a full-court press of screeching leftist nonsense in the conclusion. I don't honestly know how this book got published without the editors reigning her in. They probably should have, as a lot of the partisan rhetoric she spews here was completely unrelated to the broader topic of the book.

Finally; despite having extremely interesting subject matter to work with here, York's writing didn't bring this story to the reader in either an engaging or enjoyable fashion, IMHO.
The addition of her irrelevant and unnecessary political rhetoric aside, York did not do this timely and important story proper justice. Maybe this was a subjective thing, but I didn't even like the overall style this book is written with. I'm not sure how she's managed to land so many writing gigs, because the writing here was not very good.
Too bad, as I was excited to start this one...

I rarely ever rate a book 1 star, but this one was *so* bad, that I feel it is deserving of just that. Thankfully, it was not any longer, or I would have put it down.
Remind me to never read any more books, articles, or other writing by this author ever again.

[Tino · Rating 2 out of 5]

As is often the case the premise and subject is interesting but execution was flawed. Most of the book felt repetitive as if York realized halfway through she didn’t have that much to say after all. 2 stars.

[Chris Boutté · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'm always reluctant to read books about criticisms of social media platforms because it's an extremely important topic, but many authors don't do the topic justice. I've read quite a few books that seem to drag on and not really make strong arguments, but Jillian York did an amazing job with this book. She has years of experience in activism and holding social media companies accountable, and she's also an amazing story teller. I'm not as familiar with global issues as I'd like to be, so sometimes the stories are confusing, but Jillian was able to explain them in a comprehensive way that I could understand. 

This book dives into a variety of topics that I hadn't even thought of. Sure, we often talk about how addictive social media is or how the platforms use our data, but this book has a variety of new angles. It discusses how governments manipulate the platforms to silence activists, how sex workers are oppressed on the platforms, and much more. I think my favorite thing about Jillian's writing is that she addresses that these are difficult, nuanced subjects that need a lot of conversation. For example, she discusses hate speech and censorship and how her views of the topics have evolved over the years. If nothing else, Silicon Values will make you more aware and get you thinking about these topics in a new way.

[alex · Rating 4 out of 5]

if you saw me start this in May no you didn’t….

it took me a loooong time to get through this. a lot of information, nothing pleasant lol

York does a great job flitting from case study to case study to give a broad sense of the issues at hand: online censorship in the global South silencing revolts; sex workers around the world unable to promote themselves or hold vetting networks; too-little too-late censorship of alt-right in the US. i had no idea just how many Silicon Valley tech leaders are also neo-Nazis

in the months since i started reading this, i keep returning to the analogy of online platforms with paid but unelected leaders essentially forming a new kind of state, where their whims dictate legislation that we are as beholden to as we are our to democratically elected officials

what does it mean when the unelected leader of a private company can censor the President? why does this censorship come at the cost of many marginalised people first? how do we facilitate an online space that allows for freedom of expression that is not a breeding ground for hate speech? vvvv interesting and i will probably reread

[Apostolos Kritikos · Rating 5 out of 5]

Amazing read (or rather listen since I consumed it in audio-book format).

Jillian manages to capture all the key concerning issues of social media and big tech while reminding us the history of the web from the early days till the corona era (aka lockdowns era). The audiobook was easy to listen (kudos at Megan Tusing, the narrator) and I absolutely recommended as a companion to your walking or running routine.

[Dinh Hong · Rating 3 out of 5]

more than a decade to collect data, Jillian made a point of questioning how freedom of speech of our current and future goes. So many policemen now coming from not only government but also especially now from the silicon companies of social and internet networks. Bias view and missed the point of looking at the where money goes and influence to these Silicon companies besides the government, she just can stop at questioning.

[Stephen Harrison · Rating 5 out of 5]

I enjoyed Jillian C. York's "Silicon Values," which is filled with in-depth reporting about how major tech platforms are struggling with content moderation and censorship. York's coverage is especially good when it comes to the challenges in the Middle East, exposing how Silicon Valley has allied itself with the powers-that-be to benefit the corporate bottom line even at the cost at repressing free expression. Because York has been covering content moderation for so long, she was able to include several historical examples that reveal how in the "early days" social media companies were often making up the rules on an ad hoc basis. For example, she shares stories of interacting with young Facebook employees and how the early results were often decided by "who you knew" at the company. I was particularly moved by the examples of how content moderation is deleting the footage that we have of war crimes and could lead to us having these massive historical gaps. There were a few points in the book where I wished York could include more characterizing details about the leaders in Silicon Valley, like Nicole Wong who was "the Decider" as Google's vice president and deputy general counsel. But most of all, I was impressed by how many critical issues York was able to weave into the book, including the recent Coronavirus response by Silicon Value companies, and how York consistently and passionately argued the case in favor of free expression over censorship.

[Margaret · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting book that made me think about the control and power major tech companies have over our life. I was particularly struck with her examples of how social media has helped spark major movements and is potentially pushing American values on nudity onto the people of other countries. It has definitely made me think more deeply about these unelected global leaders and how their systems have become so much more than they were meant to be or could be handled properly.

I thought her writing was all over the place. Particularly with the things she chose to explain and dive more into and those she did not. There were some topics I needed a lot more background on that she only referenced the headline and others I felt she went way to in depth. I guess assuming that everybody would have a basic knowledge of some of the major political events or events that happened on social media (i.e I had never heard of gamergate and needed much more context and background than what she provided).

[Luke · Rating 5 out of 5]

“Infiltration and media control are part of any country's intelligence strategy," he told me. "So if they can do that, why not?"
Indeed, the battle for free expression on corporate platforms is often a battle of competing interests brought to the table by outsiders-with governments on one side and advocates of some sort on the other. Of course, corporate and advertiser interests are at play as well, but when it comes to some of the most contentious topics—
"terrorism," for example-it often feels as if the companies' policy teams would rather take a step back and let other parties duke it out.
The problem, of course, lies in companies viewing governments and citizens as equals, while in fact governments are, by and large, using their power to implement policies where passing laws is impossible without also changing the national constitution. By remaining neutral, corporations are acting as conduits of the state.
They are today's censors, not unlike the religious institutions and governments that came before them.
And although it may seem that governments and citizens (in the form of NGOs or civil society organizations) are given somewhat equal access, the truth is that no citizen, not even a director of a powerful NGO, can simply pick up the phone and dial Mark Zuckerberg to complain about a policy decision the way that Israeli prime minister Netanyahu has been known to do.”

“But just as Palestinian activist voices have been historically devalued and silenced by mainstream media, so too have they been censored by social media platforms-while Israeli hate speech on the same platforms often goes ignored.
In the summer of 2014, a few months after US-brokered peace talks faltered, three Israeli youth were kidnapped and murdered in the occupied West Bank. In retaliation, three Israeli men abducted and murdered a Palestinian teenager, leading to increased tensions, violent clashes, and an increase in rockets fired by Hamas into Israeli territory. Israel responded with airstrikes, raining rockets into Gaza and killing more than two thousand Palestinians and injuring more than ten thousand more a majority of whom were civilians. As the violence played out on the ground, social media became a secondary battlefield for both sides, as well as their supporters and detractors.
As I arrived to work one day early that summer, I received a frantic call from a Palestinian friend in the United States. At that point, the kidnapped Israeli boys had not yet been killed, and my friend had discovered a Facebook page threatening the murder, every hour, of a
"terrorist" until the boys were found. The page, in Hebrew, was quite clearly using "terrorist" as a stand-in for "Palestinian"…
the Haifa-based Palestinian digital rights group documented the disparities in how hate speech from Israelis and Palestinians is treated, noting that "Facebook is the main source of violence and incitement online" stemming from Israel.)
Meanwhile, Facebook censors Palestinian groups so often that they have created their own hashtag, #FBCensorsPalestine. That the groups have become prominent matters little: in 2016, Facebook blocked accounts belonging to editors at the Quds News Network and Shehab News Agency in the West Bank;.”

“Being a Zionist isn't like being a Hindu or Muslim or white or Black-it's like being a revolutionary socialist, it's an ideology,"" she told me. "And now, almost everything related to Palestine is getting deleted."
Another former staffer told me under the condition of anonymity that it was a "constant discussion," and that the company was under pressure from the Israeli government.
As Maria tried to point out to her superiors, Zionism is an ideology or a political doctrine, akin to "communism" or "liberalism"-not an immutable characteristic. Treating it as such is not merely a mockery of actual characteristics that make a person or group vulnerable, but elevating it-and not Palestinians—to such a level also fails to take into account the power imbalance that exists between occupied and occupier. But, Maria told me, "Palestine and Israel has always been the toughest topic at Facebook. In the beginning, it was a bit discreet," with the Arabic-language team mainly in charge of tough calls, but after the 2014 conflict between Israel and Gaza, the company moved closer to the Israeli government.
Somewhat notably, one of the first twenty members of Facebook's new External Oversight Board is Emi Palmor, under whose direction the Israeli Ministry of Justice petitioned Facebook to censor legitimate speech of human rights defenders, according to 7amleh. 34
Israel was among the first governments to secure a backdoor deal with a social media company, but it's far from the last. A year later, Vietnam's single-party government announced an alliance with Face-book.35 In 2018, the German government codified a law that required close collaboration from social media companies with more than two million users—a law that was later copied by several less democratic states, including Russia and Turkey. As states grapple with how to manage speech they find objectionable-but often not illegal-they simply circumvent traditional legislative processes, knowing that they can simply call on their friends at Facebook, Google, or Twitter to enforce their desires.”

“The [de-platforming] of the group presents Hezbollah within a Western lens as a terrorist group and erases the political history of this group and its current participation in local and regional politics.
This doesn't just mean in its dealing with Iran, but also in the context of representation at a governmental, parliamentary, and municipal level as well as in unions and syndicates."
Corporate policies often result not only in the removal of such groups, but also anyone who dares speak their name, says El Masri. "An alternative independent media platform has had several of its videos taken down on Facebook and YouTube for featuring [Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah-although they were not praising Hezbollah at all. The implications of these policies, which take on a Western purview, also pose a threat to the free speech of alternative media and independent actors."”

“a leak to the Wall Street Journal in September 2021 revealed an entire program (dubbed "XCheck") that enabled VIP status for millions of Facebook users, ensuring their posts were not moderated in the same manner as those published by the average user.”

[Venky · Rating 3 out of 5]

Following closely in the footsteps of Rebecca Mackinnon and Shoshana Zuboff, Jillian York in her interesting, upcoming and provocative work, “Silicon Values”, distills the various anomalies involved in “content moderation” that is practiced (or abdicated) by the giants of technology such as Google, Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. Ms. York brings to bear her formidable experience with and exposure to content moderation and platform intricacies in alluding to various hits and misses that both distinguish and tarnish Big Tech. A writing style that is bereft of pretentiousness and hesitancy makes Silicon Values a riveting read.

Ms. York bemoans the fact that the most aspired for and valued attribute, in the form of freedom of speech is controlled and curbed by a handful of gargantuan personalities striding the very pinnacle of Big Tech and whose actions are influenced by and beholden to powerful political connections, financial prospects and influential lobbying. Tweets and posts of influential and award winning activists such as Wael Abbas, that not just expose, but also educate the people about police brutality and other abuses in Egypt, are thus take down by the social media sites after succumbing to intense ‘back room’ pressure exerted by either the concerned Government or people wielding power. These actions resorted to by the social media sites go against the very grain of freedom of expression, a fundamental right that has been recognised from time immemorial. As Ms. York educates her readers, isegoria, a concept that allowed all male citizens in Athens, to address the democratic assembly irrespective of the fact as to whether such citizens were rich or poor, was given total prominence. The only lacuna here being the disservice meted out to women.

Ms. York although chastising all the social media sites, reserves her ire for Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg. The company has content moderation staff spread across three tiers. The staff at the lowest level, namely Tier 3, have a thankless task. They are forced to spend entire days viewing gruesome imagery and making instantaneous decisions to take down or leave in place a post. With a meagre paycheck totaling US$28,800 a day and as pitiful as US$6 a day in India, these employees receive negligible to no training not to mention an absolute lack of mental health support. This has the unfortunate consequence of posts of import and gravity being mistakenly taken down.

In order to minimize such acts and to preserve the basic ethos of human rights across the globe, the Global Network Initiative (“GNI”) was incorporated. Yahoo!, along with Google and Microsoft were the founding members and a bevy of NGOs, academic institutions and shareholder groups joined the organisation. However, as Ms. York illustrates, a reliance on a multi-stakeholder model has rendered GNI, more or less, ineffective. Facebook, Google, Microsoft and Twitter, then joined together to form the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (“GIFCT”). The objective of GIFCT was “disrupting terrorist abuse of members’ digital platforms.” Due to a deficiency in the definitions of the word terrorism etc, the work of GIFCT has also left a lot to be desired.

Ms. York also highlights other notable perils of the content moderation evil such as the takedown of posts by sex workers following the promulgations of the SESTA and FOSTA acts by the United States Government. Many of these sex workers who were reliant on their connections formed across the online network for information on client screening and other safety measures found themselves in the lurch. Another area of concern is technology assisted content moderation. Using tools of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, Big Tech attempts content moderation, but sometimes with hilarious outcomes. Thus, the residents of the English town of Scunthorpe find their accounts taken down or even refused registration because the word lying between the alphabets S and h represents a common profanity. London’s Horniman Museum found its own spam filters blocking it since the filters perceived “Horniman” as akin to “horny man.” Another problem innate with content moderation is lack of expertise with regional languages/vernacular. Luganda the most widely spoken language in Uganda with more than 8 million users hardly finds content moderation experts, proficient to analyse acceptable and offensive posts.

Similarly, there seem to be divergent standards for allowing and rejecting “hate speech” and exhortations to violence. This is where Ms. York’s book is a huge let down. Her concentration seems to be so fixated only on the misdeeds and misguided philosophies of the extreme right, that a person who is unaware of her stellar credentials might be forgiven for believing her to be an integral part of a cabalistic left wing group. Whether it be waxing eloquent on the consequences of Brandenburg v Ohio decision, the misplaced rants of Donald Trump, or the “Hindutva” extremism in India, Ms. York seems to harbour an obtuse illusion that violence is the sole preserve of the right. Hence there is no reference to the merciless and systematic killing (and not just persecution) of the minorities in Pakistan, the planned elimination of right wing campaigners by the Left Government in the Indian state of West Bengal and a myriad other relevant scenarios.

On the whole, Silicon Values in an invigorating, insightful and incisive distillation of the surveillance imposed upon free speech by the bastion that is Big Tech in the digital world.

(“Silicon Values” will be released by Verso Books (US) on the 2nd of March 2021)

[Kin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Amazing read, and I hope we can have a Thai version of it soon. Drawing from more than ten years of experience and data collection, the book does an excellent job of unpacking Silicon Valley values and revealing how they can be harmful to vulnerable people in a global context.

Her message is clear. We live in a time when the internet has its own gatekeepers: tech elites and global tech corporations. While the power of social media platforms to connect lives and facilitate social change is widely recognized, what is often overlooked is their power to shape and govern lives.

In an age of AI and algorithms, this observation may seem unsurprising. Yet York provides rich and vivid examples of how digital power can corrupt in practice, particularly when platforms prioritize profits and the narrow worldview of the Californian Ideology (not even representative of broader American values), and then "subject to influence by states and the wealthy and all too content with disregarding the needs of their subjects in favor of those with power."

A significant portion of her argument focuses on the idea of censorship, where norms are often ambiguous and highly diverse. York shows how censorship policies informed by a small faction of managerial class of tech companies, who largely comes from a very particular demographic, thus often shares similar ideas of what is acceptable and good for their business, can lead to harmful outcomes, especially when they tend to "pander to governments".

For example, controversial controls over "nudity" content risk reinforcing and re-mystifying an established ("Puritan") sexual norm, narrowly defining male and female bodies and sexuality. The filtering of media about war and violence risks erasing historical records and archives documenting government injustice and war crimes against humanity. The removal of certain words or terms as extremist content or hate speech often fails to account for cultural and contextual nuances, which in many cases inadvertently silencing marginalized voices and political dissent. And so on.

York calls for meaningful participation and inclusion of the public and civil society in shaping the governance of digital platforms (and certainly the inclusion of qualified and accountable human actors in the case involving algorithms). Yet, she emphasizes that in many cases of social plagues (hate speech, violence, sexism, racism, etc.) we should not focus only on their surface-level manifestations on social media platforms. Root causes must be addressed, "in homes and in classrooms, and in the halls of power).

All in all, enough with technosolutionism, she said, and instead demanded that we address these issues at the structural level. Solutions may include, in her words, "collectivizing Facebook or nationalizing Twitter… creating a wellspring of decentralizing alternatives… clearing out the boardrooms and executive teams and replacing them with a new generation of leaders who can represent the people."

This reminds me of recent attempts at decentralized social media platforms like Mastodon and Nostr, the idea of "Web3," and the notion of "collaborative technologies" proposed by Audrey Tang. These might be among the most concrete experimenting alternatives to challenge the status quo of tech giants (and the all-too-powerful states). At the same time, I believe that it is an urgent call for everyone who value democracy, freedom, and life-over-profit to actively engage with technology, not just as users and critics, but as builders and collaborators, if one wishes to achieve different, better futures.

[Anny · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is a good introduction book on social media censorship. I never really consider censorship that important but this book has made me rethink that.

Currently how we deal with sensitive materials (e.g. pornography, violence) in social media is pretty crude that is the corporation simply delete them. But if you think about it, these are important and valuable materials. For example, child pornography materials, terrorist related materials and the like should be given to the police to be investigated further. Human right violation materials should also be given to the relevant human right organizations. But instead we just delete all of them!

The question of what is acceptable or not is also a pretty dicey question to be handed to twenty something with no training in ethics and related context. Is image of breastfeeding okay? If 'vagina' is always censored how the hell are we supposed to talk about its health aspect and proper sex education?

These issues and a few more others discussed in the book are very important to our society and yet we left it all to the discretion of a few white guy beholden to profit and government than society. Personally, I agree with the author that this need to change.

[Patrick Pilz · Rating 3 out of 5]

I just reviewed Silicon Values by Jillian C. York. #SiliconValues #NetGalley

Regulation of speech on the internet is probably one of the topics on every ones mind, latest since the election, rise of OAN and ONAN and a president continuously sharing false and misleading information. Jillian C. York picks up this challenge, but misses to discuss this in the context of our American society, moves the discussion towards other areas of society which are not exactly on the forefront of American minds: the right of sex workers to a LinkedIn profile, classification of terrorist groups and some of the voluntary efforts of social media giants to control what we can see and what not. I think the book has some illuminating aspects to it, but the discussions do not need to be removed so far from our home yard.

The introduction was horrible. Instead of setting the tone of the book and what is there to come, Jillian opens up with a bunch of disclaimer that read so disappointing that I almost stopped reading right there, I am glad that I continued as the book was really well written, and the stories interesting. What I did not like was the samples she picked and what she wrote about.

[Duy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Tạm được, viết về mối quan hệ giữa các mạng xã hội và tự do ngôn luận.
Nhận xét chính của tác giả là mặc dù các mạng xã hội lớn (facebook, twitter... và cả cỗ máy tìm kiếm google) có quyền lực vô hạn tới quyền tự do ngôn luận của người dân, nhưng các công ty này không quan tâm, nghiên cứu đầy đủ vấn đề, và thường không có chính sách nhất quán, rất nhiều khi phản ứng một cách đối phó tạm bợ mà không theo quy củ gì cả. Với các công ty này, chính sách về tự do ngôn luận chỉ là để 'cho có', nhưng với người dùng thì đó là vấn đề sống còn, liên quan trực tiếp tới vận mệnh của vô số người.
Tuy nhiên nội dung của cuốn sách có phần không cân đối. Tác giả dành một phần lớn nói về cách các mạng xã hội kiểm duyệt nội dung của người dùng ở các nước có chính trị bất ổn (liên quan trực tiếp tới tự do và sinh mệnh của họ), và một phần tương tự nói về khó khăn của những người 'lao động tình dục' khi bị mạng xã hội kiểm soát nội dung!

[Nick Heer · Rating 3 out of 5]

“I used to believe that platforms should not moderate speech; that they should take a hands-off approach, with very few exceptions. That was naive. I still believe that Silicon Valley shouldn't be the arbiter of what we can say, but the simple fact is that we have entrusted these corporations to do just that, and as such, they must use wisely the responsibility that they have been given.”

This is from the last chapter of the book, and it describes almost perfectly how it was to read it. The first few chapters felt like a full-throated argument against any form of moderation, with deep worries about “shadow banning” and limiting expression. But as the book went on, York’s views became more complex and nuanced.

[Juliane · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a former content moderator I am astonished by Jillian’s level of insight, expertise and pointedness in the subject matter. The structure of the book is systematic in a way that encourages the reader to intellectually engage with some of the biggest dilemmas of our time. Any reader will now understand the magnitude of conflict and risk that big tech inevitably poses to humanity; as well as the urgency to find solutions to nativgate the endless greyzones of internet policy. Highly recommend!

[Karen · Rating 4 out of 5]

How do our social media habits can shape democracy? or yet, how can they shape the way we see the world through blindspot in algorithms, slow policy and censorship. York makes a very valid study about the two major social media platforms at the moment (facebook, twitter) and how their policy has changed through the years.

Thank you NetGalley and Verso Books for this arc copy of Silicon Values in exchange of an honest review.

[Ivette Yanez · Rating 5 out of 5]

Though at times it feels very academic and dense, I can't deny it's an excellent overview of what the author rightly calls Surveillance Capitalism, encompassing censorship, online moderation, digital life, Internet companies and new business models, etc. At the same time, it's often a personal account of how these topics have evolved over the past 15 years, and the lack of answers that remain. Really worth a read.

[Fiona · Rating 3 out of 5]

Weirdly judge-y. Author seems to think that social media companies ought to be prioritizing disadvantaged people as though she's never heard of capitalism and it is quite clear she has no experience or training in objective journalism. This probably would have worked better as a memoir so that the writer could insert herself even more than she does.

[Lea · Rating 3 out of 5]

I’ll grant York the fact that she has changed and adapted her opinions as time has gone on. However, her chapters on content cartels and nudity were limited in thought, and uninterested in taking into account the very real harms done by extremists. Ultimately, she shows the limitations of free speech absolutism, even when it is advocated by the left. I appreciated the international aspect of the book and her text pushed me to leave my us centric understanding of the tech industry.

[Andrew Curtice · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sections on Middle East violence were captivating, but latter half of the book really falls off. Loses focus, and seems unable to maintain a consistent argument. Beyond that, the writing is often sloppy and really makes it a challenge to get through at times.

[Julia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very good albeit lacking a broader perspective.

[Bangs · Rating 5 out of 5]

Absolutely brilliant book that will give you an in-depth view of how corporations currently treat content (and maybe some ideas of how they should instead). Cannot recommend highly enough!

[Liz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Useful overview of a range of difficult content moderation issues. It's one point of view, but it's also clear about that.

[Anon · Rating 1 out of 5]

I did not personally consider this book to be very well researched, and I did not appreciate all of the author's ad hominem attacks against anyone considered conventional.

[Kenneth Gibson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pretty good

[Pavan Singh · Rating 5 out of 5]

Check out our Books in 5 review of Silicon Values!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KckHe...

[Jojo · Rating 3 out of 5]

too contemporary