5 ms·
People calling it censorship yesterday (on this forum) don't seem to understand the meaning of the word.
by chillwaves 9y ago
People calling it censorship yesterday (on this forum) don't seem to understand the meaning of the word.
- girvo 9y agoI think that’s kind of ignoring the outsized impact these huge companies have on our lives.
- che_shirecat 9y agoYoutube holds a pretty dominating market share of video sharing but there are 10+ other relatively large sites that you could host the content in question on. There's a difference between access and an audience - youtube shouldn't be obligated to give an audience to content they don't like. People are free to migrate to other platforms (case in point - phub) if they so choose.
- chillwaves 9y agopeople are basically complaining about market share through the lens of oppression and it is sickening.
- Laaas 9y agoHow is it not censorship? It is legal, and they're not violating anything, but it is still censorship, because they are censoring something. It doesn't have to be illegal for it to be censorship.
- jacksmith21006 9y agoBecause Google is a private company is why it is NOT censorship.
- waterphone 9y agoIt's censorship, it's just legal censorship because it's not the government doing it.
- chillwaves 9y agoThat's not what censorship means.
- wlesieutre 9y agoHere's what Merriam Webster says censorship means: >1 a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring >"They oppose government censorship." The example use calls out government censorship as a specific type of censorship. If "censorship" meant "the government censoring things" you would not need to specify "government censorship" in that sentence. Yes, I know that dictionary definitions are not necessarily the final word on what something means, but they're absolutely correct here. It is a broad word and it is widely used in other contexts. People other than the government can censor things. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_censorship https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_censorship
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- optimuspaul 9y agoyeah I don't think that the definition of censorship has any caveats to it to indicate the actor must be a public entity.
- wlesieutre 9y agoThe word "censor" doesn't exclusively apply to government actions though.
- _jal 9y agoIt is a definitional thing. We're talking about law; definitions are important. Here is a somewhat useful starting point: https://www.aclu.org/other/what-censorship https://www.aclu.org/other/what-censorship
- hungerstrike 9y agoActually, I think what you meant to say is that the definition of the word censor has nothing to do with the first amendment or even government. Censorship is the "official" capacity of someone to prevent someone else from publishing. The official person could be an official of government or a private company as far as the definition is concerned. define censor - https://www.google.com/search?q=define+censor https://www.google.com/search?q=define+censor 1. an official who examines material that is about to be released, such as books, movies, news, and art, and suppresses any parts that are considered obscene, politically unacceptable, or a threat to security. 2. (in ancient Rome) either of two magistrates who held censuses and supervised public morals. 3. examine (a book, movie, etc.) officially and suppress unacceptable parts of it. So, Youtube and others are indeed censoring you when they do not allow you to publish certain videos.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- chillwaves 9y agoGreat, but every content platform has rules and censorship. The term doesn't mean much in that context. A private platform saying "You cannot say whatever you want on my microphone" is not censorship in any meaningful sense when you are free to pick up your own microphone. No one says you have a right to the users on a specific platform. I can't go on CNN and start ranting, so why should I be able to say anything I want with Youtube not able to moderate the content? It doesn't make sense. You cannot force private platforms to accept views against their economic interests and call that freedom. If someone says you will go to jail for saying something, that is censorship.
- tzs 9y ago> So, Youtube and others are indeed censoring you when they do not allow you to publish certain videos. Except YouTube does not prevent you from publishing your videos. They only prevent you from publishing them on YouTube. You can publish them on another platform, or self-publish them. Censorship is usually taken to mean suppressing or attempting to suppress a work from being published at all across some reasonably large population, which is generally something only governments have the power to do. One might make a case that a private organization that has acquired a monopoly or near monopoly could do so, but YouTube is not yet there.
- adventured 9y agoCensorship becomes an interesting tag, plausibly accurate, if the US Government regulates platforms further to such a degree that they make competing with them a lot more difficult, due to compliance cost & risk. That is, if the government effectively protects & entreches the existing giant platforms through regulatory action. Then these entities become something a lot closer to regulated broadcast platforms akin to radio or TV with ABC, NBC, etc. before the advent of expanded media thanks to the Internet.
- chillwaves 9y agoHasn't happened so why speculate?
- vortico 9y agoCensorship is the correct term for any organization restricting content. E.g. a parent restricting a child's TV is censorship. The First Ammendment only deals with censorship by the US Government.
- chillwaves 9y agoOK then the word has no meaning because every community has rules and the right to organize and self moderate. That is what is happening. You do not get to force your voice on another person's platform. How is that justice?