Return to

Patreon Killing it Self off With its Decision to De-Platform Those They Don't Like?


If you’ve been living under a rock recently, you might not know that Patreon have come out and said (explicitly) that they will de-platform people based on their arbitrary decision regardless of what their terms of service say and regardless of where the “rule breaking” (that they determine at the time) takes place.

This resulted in Sargon of Akkad (among others at other times) being de-platformed from their site in December when he talked back against white supremacists when he used their own language against them.

Keep in mind, this was on someone elses stream, not on patreon, and in context his wording was a bit crass but nothing really wrong with it. Patreon decided that although it wasnt against their terms of service, the mob didnt like him, and they didnt like him, so removed him.

In a call Matt Christiansen had with Jacqueline Hart from Patreons “Trust and Saftey” team, (a call they insisted must be kept private) Patreon has made it pretty clear on their goal. The terms and service do not matter when it comes to de-platforming people. Patreon will decide on a case by case basis who they want to remove, regardless if they are within their terms of service. They also made it clear that they will remove you even if you say something outside of patreons platform they they deam something they don’t like.

There is no appeals, there are no rules. If you want to speak, they suggest you check with them first to see if its OK for you to say it.

You can watch his video on it here:

And the transcript of the secret call here:

Sam Harris makes a good small point on this, and why hes left Patreon:

You can also listen to 1791’s video on their call to patreon (which they cannot share)

As a result of banning people off their platform for… basically not liking who they are and that they aren’t on “their side”, the side affect has left other patreon people with losing money and patrons.

This month, Dave Ruben, and Jordan Peterson are also leaving Patreon.

Interestingly, theres also apparently evidence to suggest Patreon colluded with Paypal in an attempt to shut down and hinder competition (SubscribeStart most notably) affecting many people also.

Regardless of the politics or otherwise, what pareon is doing isnt great. While they can cater to whoever they please, what they’re actually doing is attempting to use their power to shut down people they dont like and shut down competition (the latter being completely illegal). If it was in their terms of service it would be even more fine, but they have made it clear that it not, wont be, and they will arbitrarily decide who they want to shut down and when based on anything they decide to make up at the time.

There not the kind of place i want taking a cut of my money either if this is how they plan to do business, so no more from me either.



Amusing when the conservatives who used to defend freedom of association turn tail and argue their shit language deserves a platform regulated by the government.

Everyone is free to stop doing business with Patreon as they see fit, or even start a new platform that promises to avoid these sorts of biases.


You seemed to have missed the entire point. Patreon are free to do so but in doing so should make that clear in their terms of using their business. Their terms allow pretty much anyone to sign up, their terms on what is and isnt allowed is clear.

The problem is, Patreon have said behind closed doors that those terms that people sign up to don’t count. That instead they will shut you down regardless of what the terms say.

That’s what people are doing. No one is arguing that Patreon can’t do what they are doing. They are arguing that what they are doing isnt good for anyone, and that they don’t want to associate with that, so are leaving.

Did you read anything?

FYI, one of the places that did come up as competition to Patreon because of these types fo reasons was SubscribeStar. What Patreon and Paypal have apparently been caught deliberately trying to damage their business. This would be illegal.




I’ve seen plenty of garbage on this subject many places. Was hoping it wouldn’t show up here, but I suppose it was just a matter of time.

You asked for thoughts, those are mine. The business is free to do as it wishes outside of legal obligations. I will note that the TOS description I found on their site is not a legal agreement and that is problematic. It should be public facing at all times.


I suspect malice as well. But I think paypal launders people money.


Your thoughts line up with the “garbage”.


Glad I’ve managed to avoid the circle jerk here then. :beers:


Some interesting things is patreon have suggested in the past that the likes of mastercard are the ones pulling the strings, telling them to remove people they don’t like. Although in the transcript they dispute this in Sargons case, saying they had decided to do it on their own accord.

Scary thought though if you could potentially be removed from society by the people who essentially control the payment systems. Cant buy bread because mastercard have deemed you unlikable isnt a good direction.


I mean, I don’t agree with a lot of what Sargon of Akkad says (a lot of it being bigoted and purposely provocative), and think Peterson is a self-minded arsehat, but it’s worrying that a company with such a grip on the income of creators isn’t transparent with what it sees as acceptable. If there was some sort of consistency in the decision making, and how the bans were justified, it probably wouldn’t be such an issue.

I don’t necessarily think this will cause a mass exodus from the platform, by any means, but it might trigger the creation of an actual competitor. Hopefully that competitor doesn’t position itself politically, because we’d probably end up with another Gab-esque situation.

@Eden, do you have anything on the Patreon PayPal monopoly thing?


This already is happening and has been happening. Saying names means losing your life and your family.


Which it isnt. Its ultimately up to Patreon to decide how they want to do that. But it makes it pretty clear in the way they are handling things that patreon can only really be used on the basis that it cannot be considered a safe platform to fund income.

I think patreon forget they are a middleman with some extra features added on.

Its interesting as well, as they article they did with the likes of the NYT also go to show how they are more than happy to lie and fabricate information to meet their needs.

I don’t think so either, they are ultimately probably fine for people who self sensor, don’t rock the boat, etc. (anywhere), or align with patreon politically.

They just have to keep in mind if the say something (on twitter for example) that can be taken out of context and someone doesn’t like you, they can report you to patreon and have them remove you from the platform.

I think with patreon now having their intentions brought to light forcibly that has caused some decent alternative to start to be built. Only time to see how they will do.

I’ve seen someone people suggesting bringing the case to the relevant authority. but not seen first hand the evidence except for some circumstantial information.


This comment is not finished…

Its good too point out this type of behavior because it shows that Patreon does not advocate freedom even though they are taking advantage of it.

This is not unlike the days before the internet when corporations controlled what was distributed over tv and radio… so, business as usual but with different company names.

I prefer to support companies that advocate freedom.


Thank you for putting together such a comprehensive post on this topic. I used to love Patreon but the warning signs started to emerge and now I think this is starting to get out of control and very concerning. I do want to avoid supporting them, but I’m waiting for reliable alternative methods to emerge.


No alternatives will emerge until you stop supporting them.


Direct bank transactions are a thing.


There’s a few around. when they eventually get new payment processors after they were targeted.

There’s also ones like which look alright for certain use cases.


Well, it’s a tradeoff. If I stop using Patreon then the people I’m supporting on that will lose money. Unfortunately it’s more about waiting for the content creators to move. It’s a weird balance thing where I would rather try pressuring the people I support to move to alternative platforms before just cancelling my support. If I drop Patreon, L1T will lose my money. I’d rather just ask L1T to support another payment method.


The whole idea of having a middleman is to have some kind of accountability if funds are misused, or the creator doesn’t deliver what they’ve promised. Giving directly isn’t a real solution.


We also accept donations via our twitch channel; or you can just drop by to chat.


Hopefully you get a response, because I didn’t.