"So how do you pay more than lip service to the idea of public participation? How do you create "community" but limit it only to a community you'd be comfortable living in yourself? Or should you?"He added:
"Technology shouldn't be the only arbiter of its own use. (We do because we can). Journalists still get paid to exercise some judgment. But we close out citizens at our own risk. And that risk has proven to be huge."So no, there's no clear-cut answer, as you can see from the rest of Bronstein's post. But really, are we journalists allowed to really get up in arms about various infractions on the whole freedom of speech thing if we ourselves are willing to abandon it when it makes us uncomfortable?