Reasonable discussion is the hallmark of civilised conversation and there's less of it on Medium than there used to be. However, we can agree to disagree on this particular author and GEN in particular.
I'm left leaning and libertarian - which is occasionally contradictory. It does mean that I disagree, as I think you do, with censorship. People should be free to say whatever they like, as long as they understand the implications of saying so. Whether or not people are offended is neither here nor there, nobody ever died of being offended. So debate wise I'll push to the hilt for people to say what they like free from censorship.
As a lefty, I dislike power structures and Medium took a previous system that functioned as a meritocracy, and they created a hierarchy. The majority share of the audience is now in the hands of a small number of writers and editors - they decide what is written, what is published and they are accountable only to each other. That has led to an inevitable increase in nepotism, a huge drop in quality and one that Medium can and should restructure its way out of. It's not a question of censorship, it's about how you get the best writing to a readership that wants quality reading over demagoguery.
The best writing is not necessarily on the left at all times - regardless of the fact that both of us sway left. The best writing might be right wing. In a world full of populist rhetoric, I want to hear the centre ground voices, I want to hear the articulate right-wing voices because that's how society develops, views changed in the crucible of polite discussion and disagreement. If Medium consistently curates populism, it'll turn into a long-form version of Twitter... complete with echo chambers and endless trolling in the comments. That is already more prevalent than it ever has been. Both right and left are guilty of this.
I am not offended by this article, it doesn't offend me at all. I'm just disappointed that money is being funnelled away from intelligent writing elsewhere on the platform for a lefty puff piece that most of the readership already agree with. Given that my story was never going to be curated. the response to it (and the comment it originally sprung from) suggests that I'm not alone in my frustration at the Medium Publication model.
My one last point is this, if we don't like what we're reading, we should never change the channel or opt out. It's easy to be offended by things we disagree with and leave, but that doesn't foster change. It creates only animosity. When you disagree with something (as you did with my article, and I did with Drew Margery's article) you should call it out, speaking what you think to be true and enter a discussion to find out why that person thinks differently.
It's good to disagree with civility and to find common ground. It happens far less than it should - so thanks for keeping it civil :o)
