Paternalistic censorship is a very contentious and widespread phenomenon. At its heart is the trade-off between limiting freedom of speech and helping others make the right choices. Recent dramatic changes at Twitter illustrate this tension. Before Elon Musk bought Twitter, the platform banned 11,000 accounts for violating the company’s Covid misinformation policy. After the acquisition by Musk, who calls himself a “freedom of speech absolutist,” Twitter ended the policy and restored some of the accounts. People face a similar trade-off in everyday life. Should we hide a post claiming that Covid is a hoax from our grandparents? Should we hide a video promoting investment in a pyramid scheme from our friends? Should we report a tweet spreading misinformation about presidential candidates? Many people do. They limit information to ensure that others make the right choice.
In this project, we propose the first study of paternalistic censorship. Specifically, we are asking the following main research questions. Do people engage in paternalistic censorship? Why do people censor information paternalistically? Do people value having a paternalist censor information for them?
