4 ms·

I don't think you read my original reply?

• xigoi 5y ago
  I have. Nobody is saying that YouTube should post negative reviews of itself. We're saying that a website which pretty much has a monopoly on hosting videos shouldn't abuse its position by trying to be the “ministry of truth”, and it's fair to criticize it even though it's legally allowed to do that.
  • yibg 5y ago
    Isn't the basic question, should youtube be forced to do something it doesn't want to? In this case, host videos it finds objectionable for whatever reason. Same way they don't allow porn for example. From the way I see it there are only a few options: 1) Youtube hosts everything that's legal, no filters at all 2) Youtube decides what it does and doesn't host 3) Somethings are ok (e.g. news / fake news), others are not (porn). Who decides what's ok and not ok if it's not the legal system or youtube itself?
    • xigoi 5y ago
      How about this: YouTube can host whatever it wants, but it will federate with PeerTube or something so that people can discover other content too.