8 ms·

Amazon Removed Anti-Vax Documentaries from Prime Video

42 points by tareqak 8y ago

tedajax 8y ago
Good
- lugg 8y ago
  This is not good. This is a very shitty situation where nobody is winning.
- goostavos 8y ago
  Silencing ideas is not the way to correct them...
  - lern_too_spel 8y ago
    How well has letting people air these ideas worked? Compare the number of Nazis in Germany (and hate crimes committed by same) vs. Lost Causers in the American South and their hate crimes. It's one thing to hold a belief in a certain threshold for freedom of speech. It's another thing to state without evidence that it has better outcomes.
    - freedomben 8y ago
      There's a really nice place you may consider as an option that tightly controls information. No need to worry about encountering bad ideas in the People's Republic of Korea. There's also China. They have a much safer internet there. Not as safe as DPRK's internet, but still pretty good.
      - lern_too_spel 8y ago
        And yet Germany is nothing like DPRK or PRC. Maybe there exist freedom of speech thresholds in between the extremes of Somalia (where you are free to shout "fire!" in crowded theaters) and DPRK? It amazes me how many Americans religiously believe that their thresholds are the only ones that work and that the only other option is some ridiculous extreme. You can see the same religiosity in weapons freedoms. Somalians have more. North Koreans have less. Yet there are many working thresholds in between, most of which empirically perform better than the US's.
  - intrasight 8y ago
    They still have their freedom to speak. And so does Jeff Bezos.
  - CyberDildonics 8y ago
    People not wanting to listen to someone is not censorship. An organization not broadcasting you is not censorship. Even good ideas and real science aren't entitled to be broadcast by every organization in every way possible.
  - yongjik 8y ago
    Amazon isn't set out to fight and correct anti-vaxxers. (Some people do, and I admire their devotion, but it's not a fight I'd enjoy.) They just want to stem the flow of misinformation. It's not the job of a fireman to make an arsonist see the error of his ways. We just want to put out the fire.
  - belltaco 8y ago
    Fake news are not ideas.
- _red 8y ago
  Here is an insert for you to enjoy! https://imgur.com/a/Q8IvuZJ https://imgur.com/a/Q8IvuZJ
  - throwawaymath 8y ago
    Do you mind helping us interpret this? I'm not picking up from this what you probably intend.
    - _red 8y ago
      Now this is just one vaccine, and its not wise to extrapolate wholesale. However, this one clearly states: there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza from using this product. Note: Its curious I'm being downvoted for actually posted an actual insert, which has real scientific information. You would think all the "science lovers" would applaud that. Ho hum, I guess I should've posted a Merck marketing ad instead.
      - mateo1 8y ago
        don't expect them to enjoy facts. They just want their cult to prevail. They'd love to delete your "anti-vaccination" comment. Facts that go against their desires are evil propaganda and should be deleted too.
      - throwawaymath 8y ago
        Well I'm not downvoting you since 1) I can't, you responded to me; and 2) you're not being offtopic. And you're at least defending your position without memeing even if I disagree with it. That being said, I'm glad you clarified because I figured the implication you were getting at is these are harmful vaccines. Am I correct in saying your grievance is a lack of evidence that they're helpful?
        AnaniasAnanas 8y ago
        > Am I correct in saying your grievance is a lack of evidence that they're helpful? Part of the second picture that the user has highlighted basically says that said vaccine contains a mercury derivative and that it has not been tested for "carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility". So I would say that this is also part of his issue.
lugg 8y ago
It would be better to leave them up but force a disclaimer to scroll along the bottom the entire doco proclaiming factless and fictional in nature. I don't think hiding from these issues is the appropriate response. Nor is pouring gasoline on the fire fueling these conspiracy theories.
- pbreit 8y ago
  Isn’t there an in-between of doing nothing? Asking Amazon to publish an opinion is a pretty big ask. At least deleting the item doesn’t necessarily imply a position.
  - whatshisface 8y ago
    Irrespective of whether or not anti-vaccine should be suppressed, Amazon wouldn't delete a video they agreed with and thought was helpful to their brand. Eliminating undesirable media absolutely implies an opinion. The closest analogy I can think of is, if I burnt a book from my personal library, what would you infer about my opinion of its contents?
  - throwawaymath 8y ago
    > Asking Amazon to publish an opinion is a pretty big ask. It's not an opinion.
  - lugg 8y ago
    It does imply a position. And as others have said it's not an opinion. Unless you also think me saying the sky is green is also an opinion. Avoid conflating opinions and facts, that is basically trump logic.
- everybodyknows 8y ago
  Are there pro-vaccination documentaries, that Amazon could promote? If not, our indie documentarists are asleep at their cameras ...
- vasilia 8y ago
  Disclaimers don't work. In Soviet Russia, a lot of people believe in strange things like this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(2006_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(2006_film) Rossiya 1 is one of the primary TV channels with a huge audience. When those people see that someone thinks that vaccination is the main source of childhood disorders, they start using folk remedies. My classmate's child died from this stupid anti-vax propaganda. I can't believe that I'm sitting in the office and writing software for a better understanding source of cancer, reading publications about ML and so on, but my classmates really believe in this bullshit about magic power of vater, vegan food and anti-vax.
pbreit 8y ago
Unpopular opinion: I don’t like this. Would much prefer that ideas compete. Id sort of give Amazon a pass since, unlike twitter, Reddit, Facebook & YouTube, it doesn’t make many promises regarding the free exchange of ideas. But still.
- hn19128ks8 8y ago
  Today in 1985 Amazon pulls all videos discussing links between H.pylori and ulcers from its Prime platform. Many HN users laud the decision to remove the content that a "scientific consensus" of the medical community have "proven false". 'This is not about competing markets of ideas', the HN users are saying, "these are real doctors -- real scientists -- saying that the 'facts' in these videos cannot possibly be true. Therefore these are 'false facts' and should be removed." https://www.cdc.gov/ulcer/history.htm https://www.cdc.gov/ulcer/history.htm
- hamandcheese 8y ago
  I suspect you’ll find this opinion is more popular than you expect.
  - kevinthew 8y ago
    Competing ideas are good but mass public disinformation is one the 21rst century's biggest problems already. There needs to be some counter to this.
    - freedomben 8y ago
      > There needs to be some counter to this. Does the implementation of the "counter" matter to you? Do you think giant corporations should be the gatekeeper on what information/ideas/speech is permitted and what is not?
    - gubbrora 8y ago
      It's a made up problem. There has always been lots of bad information. People are better informed than ever. Just take religion and magic and superstition which have declined a lot. It's a made up problem to justify authoritarian solutions.
openloop 8y ago
Good.
throwawaymath 8y ago
Fantastic. I would be thrilled to see other tech companies declare a holy war against this kind of misinformation. In fact, it would make me ecstatic if they started doing the same with other topics that have overwhelming scientific consensus, like climate change. I frankly don't care if it's censorship. It's a hill I'll happily die on.
- _red 8y ago
  You like "science" but can't actually read the insert. Why?
  - throwawaymath 8y ago
    You responded to the wrong comment of mine, but to answer your question: I did read the insert you posted. That doesn't mean I'm qualified to interpret what it means. You posted a link with red boxes around things, and I'm inferring I'm supposed to make a new conclusion or challenge my beliefs on the subject. But I don't have sufficient context to follow what you're getting at without you explaining what claim you're making that is supported by the insert.
  - Throw22276 8y ago
    In response to the insert you posted; Have you read the insert? The first highlighted point may seem odd out of context, but the context is right in front of the highlighted section. It's not saying the vaccine is ineffective, it's saying it is for immunisation in people who currently do not have the flu. The lack of studies mentioned is in relation to its effectiveness in people who take the vaccine whilst already being infected with the flu. Highlighting the lack of proven effectiveness in children is odd too, since the very same insert states it is not for use in under 18s. It makes perfect sense it hasn't been tested on children. The Mercury part doesn't even say anything negative, simply that it is an ingredient. There are many things that we know are poisonous in some contexts/quantities, whilst being harmless in others. Im not sure if you're being disengenious on purpose, or if you simply lack the reading comprehension.
- ThrowawayR2 8y ago
rdtsc 8y ago
I wonder if they inadvertently strengthened the conspiracy theory by doing it. Sometimes censorship has that perverse effect. I easily see someone hearing from their "friend" about how Amazon has removed the video because they know it's true, and how it just validates all the bullshit claims presented there.
- throwawaymath 8y ago
  It's a balance. Banning books has been known to make them more widely consumed, but reading is intrinsically less viral (and more informationally dense, typically) than watching a video. I think it's easier to attain a critical mass of followers if these kinds of videos go unchallenged.
hugh4life 8y ago
Amazon is starting to ban some far right books. Sexual Utopia in Power is currently banned(it's on libgen) likely as a compete blacklist on it's publisher. The author had published a book on Kojeve for an academic publisher and the book has received positive feedback from many conservatives who have nothing to do with the far right. I see no reason whatsoever for it to be banned. It may be coming back because it's page is up and not completely deleted like many other books though it's still not up for sale. https://www.amazon.com/Sexual-Utopia-Power-Feminist-Civilization-ebook/product-reviews/B00ZTENZZ4/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_show_all_btm?ie=UTF8&reviewerType=all_reviews https://www.amazon.com/Sexual-Utopia-Power-Feminist-Civiliza...
Graham67 8y ago
https://youtu.be/RJh3TiCFJH4?t=30 https://youtu.be/RJh3TiCFJH4?t=30

42 points by tareqak 8y ago

tedajax 8y ago

Good

lugg 8y ago
This is not good. This is a very shitty situation where nobody is winning.
goostavos 8y ago
Silencing ideas is not the way to correct them...
- lern_too_spel 8y ago
  How well has letting people air these ideas worked? Compare the number of Nazis in Germany (and hate crimes committed by same) vs. Lost Causers in the American South and their hate crimes. It's one thing to hold a belief in a certain threshold for freedom of speech. It's another thing to state without evidence that it has better outcomes.
  - freedomben 8y ago
    There's a really nice place you may consider as an option that tightly controls information. No need to worry about encountering bad ideas in the People's Republic of Korea. There's also China. They have a much safer internet there. Not as safe as DPRK's internet, but still pretty good.
    - lern_too_spel 8y ago
      And yet Germany is nothing like DPRK or PRC. Maybe there exist freedom of speech thresholds in between the extremes of Somalia (where you are free to shout "fire!" in crowded theaters) and DPRK? It amazes me how many Americans religiously believe that their thresholds are the only ones that work and that the only other option is some ridiculous extreme. You can see the same religiosity in weapons freedoms. Somalians have more. North Koreans have less. Yet there are many working thresholds in between, most of which empirically perform better than the US's.
- intrasight 8y ago
  They still have their freedom to speak. And so does Jeff Bezos.
- CyberDildonics 8y ago
  People not wanting to listen to someone is not censorship. An organization not broadcasting you is not censorship. Even good ideas and real science aren't entitled to be broadcast by every organization in every way possible.
- yongjik 8y ago
  Amazon isn't set out to fight and correct anti-vaxxers. (Some people do, and I admire their devotion, but it's not a fight I'd enjoy.) They just want to stem the flow of misinformation. It's not the job of a fireman to make an arsonist see the error of his ways. We just want to put out the fire.
- belltaco 8y ago
  Fake news are not ideas.
_red 8y ago
Here is an insert for you to enjoy! https://imgur.com/a/Q8IvuZJ https://imgur.com/a/Q8IvuZJ
- throwawaymath 8y ago
  Do you mind helping us interpret this? I'm not picking up from this what you probably intend.
  - _red 8y ago
    Now this is just one vaccine, and its not wise to extrapolate wholesale. However, this one clearly states: there have been no controlled trials adequately demonstrating a decrease in influenza from using this product. Note: Its curious I'm being downvoted for actually posted an actual insert, which has real scientific information. You would think all the "science lovers" would applaud that. Ho hum, I guess I should've posted a Merck marketing ad instead.
    - mateo1 8y ago
      don't expect them to enjoy facts. They just want their cult to prevail. They'd love to delete your "anti-vaccination" comment. Facts that go against their desires are evil propaganda and should be deleted too.
    - throwawaymath 8y ago
      Well I'm not downvoting you since 1) I can't, you responded to me; and 2) you're not being offtopic. And you're at least defending your position without memeing even if I disagree with it. That being said, I'm glad you clarified because I figured the implication you were getting at is these are harmful vaccines. Am I correct in saying your grievance is a lack of evidence that they're helpful?
      - AnaniasAnanas 8y ago
        > Am I correct in saying your grievance is a lack of evidence that they're helpful? Part of the second picture that the user has highlighted basically says that said vaccine contains a mercury derivative and that it has not been tested for "carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility". So I would say that this is also part of his issue.

lugg 8y ago

It would be better to leave them up but force a disclaimer to scroll along the bottom the entire doco proclaiming factless and fictional in nature. I don't think hiding from these issues is the appropriate response. Nor is pouring gasoline on the fire fueling these conspiracy theories.

pbreit 8y ago
Isn’t there an in-between of doing nothing? Asking Amazon to publish an opinion is a pretty big ask. At least deleting the item doesn’t necessarily imply a position.
- whatshisface 8y ago
  Irrespective of whether or not anti-vaccine should be suppressed, Amazon wouldn't delete a video they agreed with and thought was helpful to their brand. Eliminating undesirable media absolutely implies an opinion. The closest analogy I can think of is, if I burnt a book from my personal library, what would you infer about my opinion of its contents?
- throwawaymath 8y ago
  > Asking Amazon to publish an opinion is a pretty big ask. It's not an opinion.
- lugg 8y ago
  It does imply a position. And as others have said it's not an opinion. Unless you also think me saying the sky is green is also an opinion. Avoid conflating opinions and facts, that is basically trump logic.
everybodyknows 8y ago
Are there pro-vaccination documentaries, that Amazon could promote? If not, our indie documentarists are asleep at their cameras ...
vasilia 8y ago
Disclaimers don't work. In Soviet Russia, a lot of people believe in strange things like this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(2006_film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(2006_film) Rossiya 1 is one of the primary TV channels with a huge audience. When those people see that someone thinks that vaccination is the main source of childhood disorders, they start using folk remedies. My classmate's child died from this stupid anti-vax propaganda. I can't believe that I'm sitting in the office and writing software for a better understanding source of cancer, reading publications about ML and so on, but my classmates really believe in this bullshit about magic power of vater, vegan food and anti-vax.

pbreit 8y ago

Unpopular opinion: I don’t like this. Would much prefer that ideas compete. Id sort of give Amazon a pass since, unlike twitter, Reddit, Facebook & YouTube, it doesn’t make many promises regarding the free exchange of ideas. But still.

hn19128ks8 8y ago
Today in 1985 Amazon pulls all videos discussing links between H.pylori and ulcers from its Prime platform. Many HN users laud the decision to remove the content that a "scientific consensus" of the medical community have "proven false". 'This is not about competing markets of ideas', the HN users are saying, "these are real doctors -- real scientists -- saying that the 'facts' in these videos cannot possibly be true. Therefore these are 'false facts' and should be removed." https://www.cdc.gov/ulcer/history.htm https://www.cdc.gov/ulcer/history.htm
hamandcheese 8y ago
I suspect you’ll find this opinion is more popular than you expect.
- kevinthew 8y ago
  Competing ideas are good but mass public disinformation is one the 21rst century's biggest problems already. There needs to be some counter to this.
  - freedomben 8y ago
    > There needs to be some counter to this. Does the implementation of the "counter" matter to you? Do you think giant corporations should be the gatekeeper on what information/ideas/speech is permitted and what is not?
  - gubbrora 8y ago
    It's a made up problem. There has always been lots of bad information. People are better informed than ever. Just take religion and magic and superstition which have declined a lot. It's a made up problem to justify authoritarian solutions.

openloop 8y ago

Good.

throwawaymath 8y ago

Fantastic. I would be thrilled to see other tech companies declare a holy war against this kind of misinformation. In fact, it would make me ecstatic if they started doing the same with other topics that have overwhelming scientific consensus, like climate change. I frankly don't care if it's censorship. It's a hill I'll happily die on.

_red 8y ago
You like "science" but can't actually read the insert. Why?
- throwawaymath 8y ago
  You responded to the wrong comment of mine, but to answer your question: I did read the insert you posted. That doesn't mean I'm qualified to interpret what it means. You posted a link with red boxes around things, and I'm inferring I'm supposed to make a new conclusion or challenge my beliefs on the subject. But I don't have sufficient context to follow what you're getting at without you explaining what claim you're making that is supported by the insert.
- Throw22276 8y ago
  In response to the insert you posted; Have you read the insert? The first highlighted point may seem odd out of context, but the context is right in front of the highlighted section. It's not saying the vaccine is ineffective, it's saying it is for immunisation in people who currently do not have the flu. The lack of studies mentioned is in relation to its effectiveness in people who take the vaccine whilst already being infected with the flu. Highlighting the lack of proven effectiveness in children is odd too, since the very same insert states it is not for use in under 18s. It makes perfect sense it hasn't been tested on children. The Mercury part doesn't even say anything negative, simply that it is an ingredient. There are many things that we know are poisonous in some contexts/quantities, whilst being harmless in others. Im not sure if you're being disengenious on purpose, or if you simply lack the reading comprehension.
ThrowawayR2 8y ago

rdtsc 8y ago

I wonder if they inadvertently strengthened the conspiracy theory by doing it. Sometimes censorship has that perverse effect. I easily see someone hearing from their "friend" about how Amazon has removed the video because they know it's true, and how it just validates all the bullshit claims presented there.

throwawaymath 8y ago
It's a balance. Banning books has been known to make them more widely consumed, but reading is intrinsically less viral (and more informationally dense, typically) than watching a video. I think it's easier to attain a critical mass of followers if these kinds of videos go unchallenged.

hugh4life 8y ago

Amazon is starting to ban some far right books. Sexual Utopia in Power is currently banned(it's on libgen) likely as a compete blacklist on it's publisher. The author had published a book on Kojeve for an academic publisher and the book has received positive feedback from many conservatives who have nothing to do with the far right. I see no reason whatsoever for it to be banned. It may be coming back because it's page is up and not completely deleted like many other books though it's still not up for sale. https://www.amazon.com/Sexual-Utopia-Power-Feminist-Civilization-ebook/product-reviews/B00ZTENZZ4/ref=cm_cr_dp_d_show_all_btm?ie=UTF8&reviewerType=all_reviews https://www.amazon.com/Sexual-Utopia-Power-Feminist-Civiliza...

Graham67 8y ago

https://youtu.be/RJh3TiCFJH4?t=30 https://youtu.be/RJh3TiCFJH4?t=30