Defend Non‑Expert Platforming

Non‑expert speakers on mass platforms perform a civic function beyond simple misinformation risk—raising neglected perspectives, testing consensus, and widening public argumentation—so rules for elevating voices should weigh democratic value as well as expertise. The trade‑offs are complex: blanket exclusion risks technocratic closure while unfettered amplification risks low‑quality discourse. — This reframes platform moderation debates from a binary (expert vs. liar) into a pluralistic weighing of civic epistemic value, with direct consequences for moderation policy, media norms, and democratic legitimacy.