Bluesky, the decentralized social network that runs on the AT Protocol, has recently acted to throttle access to 72 accounts in Turkey. This decision followed a request from Turkish governmental authorities. This request was initiated by the Freedom of Expression Association. In response, Bluesky deployed radical measures to protect national security interests and uphold public order.
So far under this directive, Bluesky has outright blocked 59 accounts. Furthermore, the platform has rendered 13 accounts, including at least one post from a content creator moonlighting as a hashtag researcher, undiscoverable to users within Turkey. However, we have seen government censorship on these social media platforms increase every day. This troubling trend is especially concerning when you consider the First Amendment implications and user privacy.
Bluesky uses geographic labelers, such as a recently established Turkish moderation labeler, to maintain these borders. This infrastructure ensures that the company can carry out the censorship orders of thousands of accounts, as required by the Turkish government. Though third-party mobile apps that can use Bluesky’s infrastructure are not subject to those controls. These applications power the larger open social web known as the ATmosphere. They’re creating experimental interfaces and presenting different views of Bluesky’s content, feeding outside the moderation efforts of the main app.
And the official Bluesky application doesn’t appear to allow users to choose to not have its moderation service. Fortunately, third-party clients such as Skeets, Ouranos, Deer.social, and Skywalker make it possible for users to circumvent Turkish censorship. This threat shines a light on a loophole that allows users to get around content the government has censored.
Bluesky’s community
faces the reality that any government—including those from more democratic nations like the United States—could request similar actions in the future. The company must prepare for such scenarios while balancing user rights and government requirements.Aviva Ruben, a member of the Bluesky community, expressed her concerns about the current policy:
“I like the current policy, but I do fear it will get more restrictive or change in the future – a great reason to continue pushing on alternative App Views.”
While some accounts are limited, they remain available. Bluesky’s underlying infrastructure, such as relays and personal data servers (PDSs), for their part prevents this from happening. Note that access is likely to be restricted from within Turkey. Their content and their creators can remain engaged in the Bluesky ecosystem.
This situation is an unfortunate reminder of the broader challenges social media platforms face when it comes to government censorship and protecting user rights. As Bluesky wades deeper into these activating waters, the platform’s approach to moderation and user engagement will inevitably continue to shift and grow. As a result, the company’s disregard for its users in Turkey deeply affects them. They more broadly established a significant precedent for how countries around the world should interact with social media platforms when faced with demands for censorship.