3 ms·

Is every commercial content platform free to censor the content however they want? Can Verizon censor the CNN and Fox News that is delivered by cable? Can my

by yters 7y ago

Is every commercial content platform free to censor the content however they want? Can Verizon censor the CNN and Fox News that is delivered by cable? Can my cell phone carrier censor whatever conversations I have that they don't like? Can Google skew and eliminate searches they don't agree with? The former cases seem unlikely, so what is the difference with YouTube?

vorpalhex 7y ago
> Can Verizon censor the CNN and Fox News that is delivered by cable? Yes, and they already set standards for the channels they accept on their cable platform. > Can my cell phone carrier censor whatever conversations I have that they don't like? No, your phone carrier is a common carrier. > Can Google skew and eliminate searches they don't agree with? Yes, but they might hit issues with advertising guidelines depending on intent
- ryanmarsh 7y ago
  Would it be feasible (legally) to build a website which hosts user generated content and be considered a common carrier therefore not responsible for what users post? Illegal forms of pornography would have to be the litmus test here. People get upset when content is censored which they view to be vital to the public interest. In the case of particularly gruesome combat footage or violent crime I don’t see how in some jurisdictions those sites could operate with the content NOT taken down. For instance, you recall how 8chan was taken down over the Christchurch NZ shooters manifesto and video.
  - vorpalhex 7y ago
    > Would it be feasible (legally) to build a website which hosts user generated content and be considered a common carrier therefore not responsible for what users post? This is already the case per the safe harbor. > Illegal forms of pornography would have to be the litmus test here. Note that being not liable is not the same as being immune to takedown. Youtube isn't legally liable for what you post, but they still have to comply with the law (and they are liable if they fail to comply). > People get upset when content is censored which they view to be vital to the public interest. Youtube isn't censoring material because of legal liability. Youtube censors material because their investors and advertisers don't want some materials on Youtube which they perceive to negatively affect is, such as combat footage, material seen to be preying on children and anything with nudity.
- ng12 7y ago
  The question is why YouTube and Twitter shouldn't be treated as common carriers. Is it because they're one-to-many instead of one-to-one?
  - FireBeyond 7y ago
    Because among other reasons, common carriers were given certain responsibilities to do so, among the privileges and rights they were given (legislated rights of way, exclusive access to airwaves etc.) that were deemed in the public good. There are no such limitations on YouTube, Twitter, nor are there restrictions on competition.
  - blaser-waffle 7y ago
    I need Verizon (or another carrier) to get onto the internet. I don't need Youtube to make use of the internet. If my ISP is down I can't watch TV or check my emails. If Youtube is down for an hour I can still shitpost on HN until it's back up.
- stronglikedan 7y ago
  Regarding Google, there's already an abundance of evidence that they can and do.
dependenttypes 7y ago
> Can Google skew and eliminate searches they don't agree with? They have been doing that for a while.
- hangphyr 7y ago
  Youtube has been doing that for a long time now, manually adjusting specific search results, basing it sometimes on geography. I don't know if they are still manually adjusting results in this example, but one example a couple months ago was if someone searched for "Louder with Crowder change my mind" in the US, Crowder's videos were buried several pages in. If you hop onto a VPN and try another country, the expected natural search result came up instead. One could possibly blame it on poor engineering and bugs, but given Google's talent pool, that seems unlikely.
  - shadowgovt 7y ago
    One hypothetical way that can happen is if Google is prototyping something that impacts search ordering (a lot of their prototyping starts gated US-only because the team working on a feature hasn't done the hard work of l10n for the feature yet).
nexuist 7y ago
In every case you described except for your cell carrier, yes, they can. That is not censorship so much as having the right to choose what gets shown on your platform. Verizon can and does offer TV packages that do not include CNN/Fox News. Google can and does unlist and derank websites its algorithms do not like (this is the whole premise of SEO). YouTube, as a private entity, can choose to do whatever it wants.
danso 7y ago
> Can Google skew and eliminate searches they don't agree with? A main motivation behind PageRank was dissatisfaction with the quality and content of other search engines. And Google's SERP algorithm has constantly changed and evolved over the years.

by yters 7y ago

vorpalhex 7y ago

> Can Verizon censor the CNN and Fox News that is delivered by cable? Yes, and they already set standards for the channels they accept on their cable platform. > Can my cell phone carrier censor whatever conversations I have that they don't like? No, your phone carrier is a common carrier. > Can Google skew and eliminate searches they don't agree with? Yes, but they might hit issues with advertising guidelines depending on intent

ryanmarsh 7y ago
Would it be feasible (legally) to build a website which hosts user generated content and be considered a common carrier therefore not responsible for what users post? Illegal forms of pornography would have to be the litmus test here. People get upset when content is censored which they view to be vital to the public interest. In the case of particularly gruesome combat footage or violent crime I don’t see how in some jurisdictions those sites could operate with the content NOT taken down. For instance, you recall how 8chan was taken down over the Christchurch NZ shooters manifesto and video.
- vorpalhex 7y ago
  > Would it be feasible (legally) to build a website which hosts user generated content and be considered a common carrier therefore not responsible for what users post? This is already the case per the safe harbor. > Illegal forms of pornography would have to be the litmus test here. Note that being not liable is not the same as being immune to takedown. Youtube isn't legally liable for what you post, but they still have to comply with the law (and they are liable if they fail to comply). > People get upset when content is censored which they view to be vital to the public interest. Youtube isn't censoring material because of legal liability. Youtube censors material because their investors and advertisers don't want some materials on Youtube which they perceive to negatively affect is, such as combat footage, material seen to be preying on children and anything with nudity.
ng12 7y ago
The question is why YouTube and Twitter shouldn't be treated as common carriers. Is it because they're one-to-many instead of one-to-one?
- FireBeyond 7y ago
  Because among other reasons, common carriers were given certain responsibilities to do so, among the privileges and rights they were given (legislated rights of way, exclusive access to airwaves etc.) that were deemed in the public good. There are no such limitations on YouTube, Twitter, nor are there restrictions on competition.
- blaser-waffle 7y ago
  I need Verizon (or another carrier) to get onto the internet. I don't need Youtube to make use of the internet. If my ISP is down I can't watch TV or check my emails. If Youtube is down for an hour I can still shitpost on HN until it's back up.
stronglikedan 7y ago
Regarding Google, there's already an abundance of evidence that they can and do.

dependenttypes 7y ago

> Can Google skew and eliminate searches they don't agree with? They have been doing that for a while.

hangphyr 7y ago
Youtube has been doing that for a long time now, manually adjusting specific search results, basing it sometimes on geography. I don't know if they are still manually adjusting results in this example, but one example a couple months ago was if someone searched for "Louder with Crowder change my mind" in the US, Crowder's videos were buried several pages in. If you hop onto a VPN and try another country, the expected natural search result came up instead. One could possibly blame it on poor engineering and bugs, but given Google's talent pool, that seems unlikely.
- shadowgovt 7y ago
  One hypothetical way that can happen is if Google is prototyping something that impacts search ordering (a lot of their prototyping starts gated US-only because the team working on a feature hasn't done the hard work of l10n for the feature yet).

nexuist 7y ago

In every case you described except for your cell carrier, yes, they can. That is not censorship so much as having the right to choose what gets shown on your platform. Verizon can and does offer TV packages that do not include CNN/Fox News. Google can and does unlist and derank websites its algorithms do not like (this is the whole premise of SEO). YouTube, as a private entity, can choose to do whatever it wants.

danso 7y ago

> Can Google skew and eliminate searches they don't agree with? A main motivation behind PageRank was dissatisfaction with the quality and content of other search engines. And Google's SERP algorithm has constantly changed and evolved over the years.