11 ms·

You're mistaking what Youtube is. Not being on Youtube isn't censorship, it's the other way around. Being on Youtube is being given a pedestal. you also got you

You're mistaking what Youtube is. Not being on Youtube isn't censorship, it's the other way around. Being on Youtube is being given a pedestal. you also got your lesson about censorship backwards, tell me one time in history when giving a megaphone to the loudest voice to spread their bullshit was a good idea. If Hilter hadn't been given a pedestal to spread his hateful message, the world would've been a better place. No one is entitled to be given a "platform" to spread their message. Youtube is a megaphone and they have all the rights to control which messages they don't want to amplify. It also very much reasonable to refuse to amplify messages that literally lead to real human beings dying. People who listen to Fox News have a 3x higher chance of dying of COVID than people who don't [0]. Killing your own users is the stupidest thing a business can do. [0] https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828993/data-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828...

warning26 5y ago
> No one is entitled to be given a "platform" to spread their message. Youtube is a megaphone and they have all the rights to control which messages they want to amplify. Exactly, and this is what so many discussions of social media "censorship" miss. You have a right to say whatever you want. You don't have a right to have whatever you say automatically broadcast (and algorithmically surfaced to) millions of users. It would be like arguing that a newspaper should be required to publish anything anyone wrote.
AdrianB1 5y ago
When YouTube is on the same level with utility companies, then your argument does not hold. The size and specificity of YouTube service makes it an utility company, not a small country club that can select the customers as they want.
- nickthegreek 5y ago
  ISPs aren’t even classified as public utilities. Maybe that’s a better place to start.
  - AdrianB1 5y ago
    Youtube is not an ISP, but you are right, ISP is also a (different type of) utility.
- ehsankia 5y ago
  > When YouTube is on the same level with utility companies Well that day is not today, and you can live just fine without being able to post to Youtube. The majority of Americans don't post to Youtube and they live just fine. Also, for the majority of human history, it was literally impossible to have your opinions broadcasted to millions of people across the globe, let alone do it for free. So no, nothing about being able to post a video on Youtube is a "right" or a "necessity". Nor is it in any shape of form comparable to utilities.

warning26 5y ago

> No one is entitled to be given a "platform" to spread their message. Youtube is a megaphone and they have all the rights to control which messages they want to amplify. Exactly, and this is what so many discussions of social media "censorship" miss. You have a right to say whatever you want. You don't have a right to have whatever you say automatically broadcast (and algorithmically surfaced to) millions of users. It would be like arguing that a newspaper should be required to publish anything anyone wrote.

AdrianB1 5y ago

When YouTube is on the same level with utility companies, then your argument does not hold. The size and specificity of YouTube service makes it an utility company, not a small country club that can select the customers as they want.

nickthegreek 5y ago
ISPs aren’t even classified as public utilities. Maybe that’s a better place to start.
- AdrianB1 5y ago
  Youtube is not an ISP, but you are right, ISP is also a (different type of) utility.
ehsankia 5y ago
> When YouTube is on the same level with utility companies Well that day is not today, and you can live just fine without being able to post to Youtube. The majority of Americans don't post to Youtube and they live just fine. Also, for the majority of human history, it was literally impossible to have your opinions broadcasted to millions of people across the globe, let alone do it for free. So no, nothing about being able to post a video on Youtube is a "right" or a "necessity". Nor is it in any shape of form comparable to utilities.