A few days ago FreeStartr got an email from a reporter at a major outlet. The line of questioning seemed to be problematic in its assumptions, so FreeStartr has decided to answer here:
Email from Major Outlet:
I am hoping to arrange a phone interview with someone from Freestar about your promises to not ban or censor any fundraisers and how that works. Specifically, I want to talk about what if anything you do to ensure that hate groups do not raise funds on your site.
If someone from your press team could email me to arrange a time to talk, that would be great.
Thanks in advance and I hope to hear from you soon.
Answer from FreeStartr
A better question might be why you use rhetoric like “Hate Speech” or “Hate Group” in a country that has as its First Amendment and highest principle, Free Speech?
The terms “Hate Speech” and “Hate Group” are propaganda tools used to end conversations that may contain ideas that some find offensive, so let’s start with the implicit assumption in your question.
The current media strategy of “news” organizations is to get some kind of concession about a “hate group” and then use a wide brush to paint anyone that the left (or the reporter) disagrees with.
FreeStartr assumes that some ideas are offensive–, that some projects are “politically incorrect” and that it’s exactly those projects that get kicked off of other platforms. Those projects have a place to go on FreeStartr.
The law says it’s illegal to libel or threaten people with bodily harm, and FreeStatr maintains the law as a standard. Words may offend some people, but thoughts and ideas are not illegal in a truly free society.
A better question is “does XYZ News actually support Freedom?” Your question sounds more like something from the Soviet Union than the United States of America.