4 ms·
When a private company with a market share of information as large as Youtube acts as an arbitrer of truth, regulation to prevent this would be nice, yes.
by mach1ne 5y ago
When a private company with a market share of information as large as Youtube acts as an arbitrer of truth, regulation to prevent this would be nice, yes.
- IgorPartola 5y agoSo you trust the government to decide what is true and what isn’t but not YouTube?
- eric_cc 5y agoOr we can move beyond the concept of trust. How about not banning content you don't like?
- IgorPartola 5y agoHuh? That makes no sense.
- eric_cc 5y agoThere is no need for trusting anybody. The concept that we must trust the government or YouTube to determine truth is ridiculous. How about neither of them ban content they don’t like? As individuals, we shouldn’t trust. We should verify.
- IgorPartola 5y agoOK great. So do you have a chemistry lab in your house to verify that the toothpaste you buy doesn’t contain heavy metals? Do you do your own testing of the meat you buy to ensure it doesn’t contain BGH, antibiotics, parasites? Do you manufacture your own water testing kits since you can’t trust sending samples to a lab? Do you manufacture your own computing devices since you can’t trust that others aren’t spying on you using your phone or laptop? This is the kind of answer a 14 year old who hasn’t yet grasped the concept of not-absolutism would give. It’s absurd.
- zepto 5y agoExcept they aren’t acting as an arbiter of truth. They are just regulating their own platform. It’s not a secret that they are doing this.
- etchalon 5y agoI am now incredibly interested in what the term “market share of information” is, because that’s a brand new nonsense term I’m sure will spread like wildfire.
- nova22033 5y agoShould fox news be required to give equal time to liberal opinion hosts? It's the biggest cable news outlet.