[southpawgirl]

I don't think there's a full-fledged conspiracy at play - it's more like a progressive process of disneyfication of the internet: apps and not websites (easier to control and monetize), progressively more bland content, soon preferential allocation of the band for the majors, and so on. This is what happens when a resource becomes economically appetising: the stakeholders try to enlarge the user base as much as possible by means that include the sanitisation of the image of the media (cinema too, for example, was considered dangerous when it was young).

Soon enough they will be able to sell 'the internet' to people like my mother ('omg, you work "on the internet"? but there are pedophiles "on the internet!"' 'Mum, am thirty' [sic])

We knew the internet while it was the Far West. It was (allegedly) dangerous to some extent, it was fun, and very much free. I hope it will stay such (well, it still isn't that much anymore, but still) to the maximum possible extent but I don't feel very optimistic, bar for some marginalised areas like IRC.

[belluchan]

> it's more like a progressive process of disneyfication of the internet

That Disney hides any reference to notion of gay and lesbian lifestyles kind of bugs me.

[southpawgirl]

Can't stand Disney tbh. Also, sanitisation is always accompanied by a drop in quality. I am rather flabbergasted by the suggestion of an LGBT filter, but then again, the whole of the available categories is a religious fundamentalist's wet dream, and not a representation of the mainstream. I wonder why this clumsy heavy-handedness...