4 ms·

I really really like it, just like I really really like what's his name being deplatformed. I like it even more that I can't readily remember his name, right, A

by milemi 6y ago

I really really like it, just like I really really like what's his name being deplatformed. I like it even more that I can't readily remember his name, right, Alex Jones. YouTube has no duty to be a platform for Diamond and Silk in scrubs.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
strken 6y ago
It has no legal duty to be a platform, nor to deplatform. It arguably has moral duties: to facilitate free discussion, and to remove harmful material. In this case there's a clear clash between the two that will make a lot of readers nervous.
- techntoke 6y ago
  Why does it have the moral duty, when you signed it away in the TOS when you used their service? Host your own videos if you don't like it or better yet build a better platform that is censorship-resistant.
  - milemi 6y ago
    A reminder that people have tried that, and it invariably turns into a chan. Which is what YouTube would become if it went hands-off.
  - sergiotapia 6y ago
    HONK HONKs love saying this tripe line everywhere online, but whenever someone tries and gains traction The Cancel Squad deplatforms them through their incestuous in-group.
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  Actually given they enjoy Section 230 protections, I would argue they DO have a legal duty to be a platform. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communica...
terakilobyte 6y ago
How would you react to your own ideas being censored? YouTube here has decided what the “correct” messaging is for the many based on the decisions of a few. Is there no room for dissenting opinion? Perhaps more dangerous are the people who now are firmly convinced the lockdown should be over simply because the video was taken down. When is the proper approach to discuss and counter instead of suppress?
- milemi 6y ago
  I'm not super familiar with YouTube's policy on this, but apparently they decided to curb what they deem to be COVID-19 misinformation. I completely agree that what these two are doing is spreading misinformation, this is not anywhere in the range of a seasonal flu, the numbers are clear on that. It's very naive to think that what these two are doing is a good faith attempt to present a dissenting opinion. If someone wants to use this tragedy as an opportunity to launch their right-wing media career I don't think YouTube is obliged to be an accomplice. As for my opinions being silenced, if I ever yell fire in a theater, or tell people to drink poison laced Kool-Aid, or tell them to ignore this pandemic, I hope I get what's coming to me.
  - runawaybottle 6y ago
    Have you seen Trump’s press conferences? You’d have to censor half the stuff he says, or half the stuff the right wing pushes. The Heritage Foundation is literally on a media blitz right now on Youtube pushing the Wuhan Lab outbreak theory (which I entertain as something that needs inspection, but I’m rethinking the whole thing now that I know one of the lying think-tanks that propagated the Iraq War narrative is cooking up some new bullshit). Censoring misinformation on YouTube is like censoring porn. Wait, I guess something as absurd as that actually exists in Japan. Alright, never mind, humanity has no bounds, continue on in your paradoxical ways. Censor the flat-earthers while you’re at it at, at least we know that’s bullshit for sure.
  - um_ya 6y ago
    And what happens when you yell fire in a movie theater and they silence you when it's true? It's not just about the "incorrect" content that's posted on Youtube, it's also the correct content that gets censored. How else would we learn about the water that makes the frogs gay?
JPKab 6y ago
Censorship is a fickle friend. It's great, until you inevitably find that you hold a minority, unpopular opinion on an issue. Your flippant remark indicates a lack of deep thinking on this issue, and once I googled Diamond and Silk, I realize that your probably a bit of a partisan as well. The removal of Alex Jones didn't help anything. It just helped reinforce the paranoia he and his supporters have, which is that a vast conspiracy exists to silence him and others who believe his theories. Those supporters now listen to him on whatever alternate platform (my brother in law is one of them) and it's even harder to talk to them now due to the Youtube cancellation. You feel better emotionally because he's off Youtube. Feels like a victory for you, doesn't it? It's hollow. My brother-in-law just listens even more rabidly, and he votes. Enjoy your false victory. Jones is stronger than ever now. Censorship doesn't work. It never will.
- milemi 6y ago
  I see your brother in law (way to draw grand conclusions based on a sample of one, btw), and raise you an article in nytimes, which might be, just might be, a bit better researched https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/04/technology/alex-jones-infowars-bans-traffic.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/04/technology/alex-jones-inf... The article isn’t recent, and I challenge you to find a more recent record that paints a less gloomy picture for him, but I doubt you’ll find it. Alex Jones is a non-entity now compared to his heyday. Deplatforming works, your extended family notwithstanding.

by milemi 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

strken 6y ago

It has no legal duty to be a platform, nor to deplatform. It arguably has moral duties: to facilitate free discussion, and to remove harmful material. In this case there's a clear clash between the two that will make a lot of readers nervous.

techntoke 6y ago
Why does it have the moral duty, when you signed it away in the TOS when you used their service? Host your own videos if you don't like it or better yet build a better platform that is censorship-resistant.
- milemi 6y ago
  A reminder that people have tried that, and it invariably turns into a chan. Which is what YouTube would become if it went hands-off.
- sergiotapia 6y ago
  HONK HONKs love saying this tripe line everywhere online, but whenever someone tries and gains traction The Cancel Squad deplatforms them through their incestuous in-group.
throwawaysea 6y ago
Actually given they enjoy Section 230 protections, I would argue they DO have a legal duty to be a platform. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communications_Decency_Act https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230_of_the_Communica...

terakilobyte 6y ago

How would you react to your own ideas being censored? YouTube here has decided what the “correct” messaging is for the many based on the decisions of a few. Is there no room for dissenting opinion? Perhaps more dangerous are the people who now are firmly convinced the lockdown should be over simply because the video was taken down. When is the proper approach to discuss and counter instead of suppress?

milemi 6y ago
I'm not super familiar with YouTube's policy on this, but apparently they decided to curb what they deem to be COVID-19 misinformation. I completely agree that what these two are doing is spreading misinformation, this is not anywhere in the range of a seasonal flu, the numbers are clear on that. It's very naive to think that what these two are doing is a good faith attempt to present a dissenting opinion. If someone wants to use this tragedy as an opportunity to launch their right-wing media career I don't think YouTube is obliged to be an accomplice. As for my opinions being silenced, if I ever yell fire in a theater, or tell people to drink poison laced Kool-Aid, or tell them to ignore this pandemic, I hope I get what's coming to me.
- runawaybottle 6y ago
  Have you seen Trump’s press conferences? You’d have to censor half the stuff he says, or half the stuff the right wing pushes. The Heritage Foundation is literally on a media blitz right now on Youtube pushing the Wuhan Lab outbreak theory (which I entertain as something that needs inspection, but I’m rethinking the whole thing now that I know one of the lying think-tanks that propagated the Iraq War narrative is cooking up some new bullshit). Censoring misinformation on YouTube is like censoring porn. Wait, I guess something as absurd as that actually exists in Japan. Alright, never mind, humanity has no bounds, continue on in your paradoxical ways. Censor the flat-earthers while you’re at it at, at least we know that’s bullshit for sure.
- um_ya 6y ago
  And what happens when you yell fire in a movie theater and they silence you when it's true? It's not just about the "incorrect" content that's posted on Youtube, it's also the correct content that gets censored. How else would we learn about the water that makes the frogs gay?

JPKab 6y ago

Censorship is a fickle friend. It's great, until you inevitably find that you hold a minority, unpopular opinion on an issue. Your flippant remark indicates a lack of deep thinking on this issue, and once I googled Diamond and Silk, I realize that your probably a bit of a partisan as well. The removal of Alex Jones didn't help anything. It just helped reinforce the paranoia he and his supporters have, which is that a vast conspiracy exists to silence him and others who believe his theories. Those supporters now listen to him on whatever alternate platform (my brother in law is one of them) and it's even harder to talk to them now due to the Youtube cancellation. You feel better emotionally because he's off Youtube. Feels like a victory for you, doesn't it? It's hollow. My brother-in-law just listens even more rabidly, and he votes. Enjoy your false victory. Jones is stronger than ever now. Censorship doesn't work. It never will.

milemi 6y ago
I see your brother in law (way to draw grand conclusions based on a sample of one, btw), and raise you an article in nytimes, which might be, just might be, a bit better researched https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/04/technology/alex-jones-infowars-bans-traffic.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/04/technology/alex-jones-inf... The article isn’t recent, and I challenge you to find a more recent record that paints a less gloomy picture for him, but I doubt you’ll find it. Alex Jones is a non-entity now compared to his heyday. Deplatforming works, your extended family notwithstanding.