4 ms·
Controversy sells. Also, crazy paranoid ravings are a time honored entertainment tradition. I don't buy for a second that Snowden's interview is being avoided
by emn13 13y ago
Controversy sells. Also, crazy paranoid ravings are a time honored entertainment tradition. I don't buy for a second that Snowden's interview is being avoided because it's not newsworthy enough. In any case, since when did youtube exert editorial control to bar un-entertaining videos?
This looks like real self-censorship: it's not newsworthy enough to be worth alienating people that you might want to have as your friend later on. You still don't need a conspiracy to explain it; but it's nevertheless toxic for democracy.
Frankly, I think self-censorship like this is much worse than explicit censorship. At least with explicit censorship there's still some attempt to question the party line; but with self-censorship you've lost even that.
As to the video itself, is it possible ARD simply has a copyright claim it wishes to enforce?
- krapp 13y agoI don't think the Snowden story is that controversial anymore. >As to the video itself, is it possible ARD simply has a copyright claim it wishes to enforce? Maybe? Affiliates certainly aren't going to pay money for it, they'll just take whatever feeds their parent station sends them, and if the parents aren't willing to pay for it then it doesn't get covered in depth.
- tripzilch 13y ago> As to the video itself, is it possible ARD simply has a copyright claim it wishes to enforce? It's on archive.org now: https://archive.org/details/snowden_interview_en https://archive.org/details/snowden_interview_en (thanks to zeeed for the link) Not entirely clear about the license, it says "opensource movies" and credits the NDR person in the metadata.