<div class="text-justify">

Over lunch today, I spent time discussing some of the things of the world with a colleague, someone who knows about my life on Steem and has patiently listened as I go on and on about it, though we do talk about a thousand other things as well. However, he was interested about one aspect of Steem in comparison to platforms like Facebook and Twitter. 

> *Is it a platform - Or a publisher?*

https://i.imgur.com/X6sCuLo.jpg

This is an important question and one that has quite a lot of legal ramifications because while Facebook has long hidden behind its position as a neutral platform, but has increasingly added the defense it is a publisher to protect itself in court. Being a publisher takes away the platform protection of not being responsible for what it has on its site, but can protect it through the protection of free speech and the freedom to make editorial decisions, namely who it allows in and, who it keeps out -Facebook chooses *what not* to publish.

This obviously means that there is a great amount of room for abuse as Facebook is first and foremost a business which has responsibilities to its shareholders. With the publishing powers to *curate* and moderate their content and exclude and ban content from appearing or having it taken down, they can manipulate the view in their favor, something that will increase profits that funnel to the parent and provide a very strong competitive advantage. 

With 4 billion people on the internet and a full half of them on Facebook, this puts them in a *very* powerful position and perhaps one that at least *some of those people might come to question and therefore look for alternatives. They are the largest publisher in the world and seem to be using their data collection processes to alter society in the way they choose - which just happens to be in whatever way makes them more money. 

So, what about Steem? Is it a publisher too?

I think it is a true platform as it is content impartial and while there is *curation,* it isn't performed by the centralized platform owners, it is done by the users themselves with the platform itself taking no cut as unlike Facebook, it is not a legal entity, it can own nothing. Companies have the same rights as people, they can own property - What does Steem own - what profits does Steem take?

>Zero.

This is why it doesn't have to worry about what is published here as the blockchain is code, algorithms with no personal horse in the race, no shareholders it is looking to satisfy, no board of directors, no owners. Yes, you can own Steem, but it doesn't actually give ownership of the blockchain, it gives access to its capabilities, the pool, the infrastructure. This is why I believe owning STEEM POWER is owning a piece of the internet, web 3.0 - not the "wires" it runs upon. 

The value of Steem infrastructure is the code itself and what that code allows people to do. Steem is not the servers, it is not the interfaces, it is not even the people. Just code. What that code allows people to do however is become publishers themselves, as well as many other things including integrating tokenized economics into the experience to attract and compel users. 

While this might not seem important at this point in time for most people, I think that it is changing and the more political unrest through economic problems, the more banning and demonetization from the *publishers* who claimed to be platforms that give people voices, the more people who will look toward alternatives. At what point will there be blockchain communities built for Hong Kong, Bolivia and all of the social movements that get banned from the centralized platforms, the ones that don't want to give rise to such voices as it will risk their advertising revenue numbers?

>Steem doesn't care about revenue

While the users of Steem might focus on the earnings at this time as most are crypto enthusiasts  and creators looking to earn, later it could be a different story. Later, people might actually value having a voice in the world that is protected because the *platform* they use doesn't care about what any voice says as it doesn't take a profit either way. What this means is that the people of Steem who curate are the ones that direct the flow of value from the pool to and from content, but that voice itself is still free to speak. 

>Steem has no skin in the game

Steem is just code that supplies connectors to the platform and it is the people of Steem who choose what kinds of interfaces are built, what content gets posted and, which earn. Steem doesn't care who you are, it doesn't care who the witnesses are, it doesn't care about how much stake you have or what you post about. The code will place value where the stake places it, it will remove value from where the stake redirects it. Steem is not sentient, it is not driven by laws, it is ours. 

While people talk about, *my Facebook page, my Twitter account, my Instagram,* they don't seem to consider that if the publisher chooses whether that account can transact or not, it isn't theirs at all. On Steem I know that when I say *my Steem account,* that is just what it is. 

This is the beauty of a platform like Steem, it is completely innocent as it has zero care or action without us, it doesn't look to repress content that may harm it, it doesn't look to boost content that may help it.

It is a truly *content neutral* platform - that allows the users to decide what has value.

Taraz
[ a Steem original ]

</div>

<center>[![Onboarding](https://i.imgur.com/e6A1MiM.png)](https://steemonboarding.com/)</center>