Hi Mike, I understand your concerns and reactions. However, based on my five years of experience on this platform, I believe Medium does not deliberately censor content. The system might have filters for certain types of content and images. I diligently analyze my stories and have found a few patterns that might help clarify this issue for writers and prevent frustration with Medium.
One observation is that when I wrote a story using convoluted language with numerous scientific links, it received very few views. This doesn't mean Medium disliked my stories, as several of them were gratefully boosted during that time but not anymore. However, my gut feeling is that the algorithm might interpret such stories as link farms and lower their distribution, without recognizing their value and scientific rigor.
Another consideration is that sensitive words like "cancer" or "suicide" might trigger the algorithm to flag the content for human review. This happened to me several times. For example, one of my stories had no organic views for three days but was suddenly boosted on the fourth day, attracting thousands of readers.
To be fair, Medium is a very complex system with thousands of contributors, making it impossible for human curators to review all stories. Therefore, my point is that rather than overt censorship, it might be a lack of capacity to apply human intelligence for fairer distribution.
I believe the boost program, which I am part of, addresses this issue through community nominations. However, there seems to be a lack of Subject Matter Experts (SMEs). For example, a generic curator might not be expected to validate the value of a professional story that requires a specialist, like a seasoned medical doctor and a scientist in your case.
My concern is that when expert nominators endorse a story, curators should not rush but get it checked by a supervisor who understands the context. If Medium can achieve this, it will create a more satisfying experience for both writers and readers. Thank you for expressing your thoughts based on sharp observations and inviting to transparency which is a wonderful relationship building.
Once Medium made a mistake in 2022 removing the "Further Distribution" label without notifying writers. I left a critical but constructive comment and VP Scott Lamb acknowledged it openly by replying that they failed to do so and they would be more careful about informing the community. His words soften the situation and the argument in his blog stopped and even turned to positive.
