Alex Jones..

[Thecaferacer]

The issue of YouTube deciding what is and what isn't hate speech isn't really the problem. The problem is YouTube built it's business on being a platform only, that anyone could self publish and broadcast and the popular would rise and the unpopular sink.

They built their business on this premise and profited astronomically from content creators using their platform from its inception until now.

Now they have become a multi-billion dollar company off the back of the creators work they decide to become publishers and censor content that doesn't adhere to their own values, in turn throwing them under the bus by banning and demonitising.

The above isn't a problem in itself if that was always the way they operated the business, but it wasn't.

 

[StriderX]

Things evolved and the nature of social media became apparent, Youtube's algorithm helped make communities and kept them in there with little else on offer, assuming they couldn't just rewrite a massive amount of code, they only had one choice to keep advertisers happy.

We didn't know in 2005 that things would polarise by the very nature of these platforms, so them being different now is hardly surprising, it's called learning.

It doesn't matter if it's right or wrong, it's simply dollars.

 

[Roar87]

Youtube should be confident of the fact that they are/were the premier video hosting site on the internet, they should be confident enough to say to advertisers that they're an open platform, fair enough if advertisers don't want their videos associating with certain channels or types of channels, but they shouldn't have the power to have those channels removed in their entirety. People will move away from Youtube in the long term.

 

[Thecaferacer]

You think far left and far right speech has only existed since 2005? It was only 3 years earlier Pim Fortuyn was murdered by a leftist extremist.

I remember YouTube when it was created and was dubbed the alternative to TV where anyone could self publish free of the constraints of the media organisations. The rot set in when the algorithms started attaching adverts to videos that were attracting the most views and likes which meant companies were then linked with undesirable videos. It's the advertisers fault for being lazy and chasing the dollar wherever it leads.

Society and content hasn't changed, YouTube has by deciding it's going to be a left leaning publisher after they lied to everybody to get them to use them.

 

[jsmoke]

Youtube should be confident of the fact that they are/were the premier video hosting site on the internet, they should be confident enough to say to advertisers that they're an open platform, fair enough if advertisers don't want their videos associating with certain channels or types of channels, but they shouldn't have the power to have those channels removed in their entirety. People will move away from Youtube in the long term.

Move away to who though, who can handle that amount of cpu/storage and bandwidth?

I predict things will go mobile with 5g and a new technology will appear for storage and cpu power.

 

[Caracus2k]

Well when parents of murdered children are harassed for months on end because some inbred hick thinks otherwise, then yes it is.

If you were to equally walk up to a 90 year old survivor of Auschwitz and said it never happened, and did it constantly, calling them, sending them mail, stalking them for months, i'd hope the book was thrown at them VERY hard. Same with 9/11 victims, victims of Armenian genocide, victims of communism and populism, victims of just about anything being harassed when it's very clear it happened is grounds for telling you to get the **** off the platform.

A certain previously on record as a genocide denier Cenk Uygur and his Young Turk Network might have to worry if YouTube ever decides to impartially enforce their rules.

The very fact that the left wing 'news' network he presents on is named after the architects of genocide is surely a form of harassment given Cenk's previous positions stated position on the matter?

I can lt imagine youtube would not at least denonetize a 'right' wing channel hosted by a known previous Jewish Holocaust denier called something like 'the Hitler/Nazi news network', 'the Waffen SS', 'the final solution' or 'Fourth Reich'

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Nobody but raging frothers think they are "destroying their own platform". Normal moral people dont want to see hate speech, its simple.

Exactly this. YT won't be hit by this at all. Its advertisers don't want to be associated with hate speech. It will be them that are pushing this agenda.

Then I'd ask you to provide evidence, if you couldn't satisfy your claim then you'd be ridiculed, and rightly so. I wouldn't ask you to be banned from speaking again, because you might one day be telling the truth. Or I might abuse the power to ban people from speaking by asking for any dissenting opinions to my own be banned.

Are you kidding me? Ask Alex Jones to provide evidence? He doesn't care about evidence. He cares about hits and people buying the overpriced crap from his store. You think him and his fans aren't already ridiculed? They thrive on that. It feeds into his conspiracy theories. It wouldn't be a problem except too many people believe the lies he spouts. Advertisers don't want to be associated with his channel and channels like it anymore. They provide the $ and so call the shots. That is the market working.

 

[chroniclard]

So much salty tears because some hate preaching lying loon is banned, grow up and stop being douchebags.

 

[i-bert]

It is a very sad time when people are happy to see voices silenced. All speech can be defined as "Hate speech", it just depends who cries the loudest.

Inciting violence is a different matter.

And it's not just Alex Jones, it's anyone who does not fit their narrative.

 

[V F]

lmao, there you happy?

Fake news.

 

[Sankari]

Why were the parents even aware of what Alex Jones said on his Youtube channel?

It doesn't matter why they were aware of it; that's irrelevant. You're simply dodging the issue.

Are there no other people who said Sandy Hook might have been a hoax?

Yes, and that's irrelevant too.

Are we banned from talking about conspiracy theories incase the victims get upset?

If you have complaints about YouTube's terms of service, I suggest you take them to YouTube. Corporations are free to remove anyone who breaks their terms of service, and I don't have a problem with that. I've been banned from Twitter, but you won't hear me whinging about it.

He has since rescinded those remarks by the way

Only because the families took legal action against him.

 

[GGizmo]

I think the important thing to remember is that most of the speech/videos youtube is banning isn't illegal.

Also remember most of the time content is being removed by a bot, not a human.

Each time people on the left keep calling for censorship they get hit worst. Like in the first adpocalypes people couldnt talk about being bullied, their sexuality or suicide without youtube taking action against their videos.

Now we're back again, the same people haven't learned their lesson and again mainly innocent videos are being removed, like most nazi historical videos are being taken down, videos about anne frank, even anti-nazi/fascist videos are being taken down, all because they hit the keywords for this bot to take action.

I think we have to remember this phrase: "the road to hell is paved with good intentions".

As soon as people start advocating for a billion dollar company to regulate what they say, then we're all in trouble. The principle is being set.

 

[StriderX]

It doesn't matter if its illegal, it only matters if you agree to the terms and break them.

Literally that is it, any moral argument is a worthless call to authority, which is rather ironic considering most of those offended by this company doing what it pleases are free speech/libertarian/small-no government advocates and yet are happy that a behemoth of a government that does none of those things is taking a look at it?

Bloody nonsensical hypocrites.

/reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

 

[Sankari]

I think the important thing to remember is that most of the speech/videos youtube is banning isn't illegal.

Irrelevant. It doesn't need to be. If it breaks the ToS, that's the end of the story.

Want to stay on YT? Obey the ToS that you agreed to when you signed up. It's not rocket science.

As soon as people start advocating for a billion dollar company to regulate what they say

YouTube has always regulated what we say on their platform. This hasn't changed.

then we're all in trouble. The principle is being set.

How are we in trouble? What principle?

 

[wesimmo]

The fact of the matter is that YouTube with their existing ToCs and policies are by far and away the largest of their kind.

That kind of indicates that the majority of people are perfectly happy with the way it works for them. The only people who could get upset are, by definition, at the extreme.

 

[GGizmo]

Irrelevant. It doesn't need to be. If it breaks the ToS, that's the end of the story.

Want to stay on YT? Obey the ToS that you agreed to when you signed up. It's not rocket science.

That is the point a lot of people complain about. They have rules but nobody knows where the line is until suddenly YT starts removing videos.

The people who upload educational videos about the the second world war and nazi germany, educating people to show how it happened so it won't happen again, all their videos have suddenly been removed. The people who have talked about being bullied, their suicide experiences etc to help educate people, all their videos were punished. More left leaning videos have been removed or punished in some way than the supposed target. Alex Jones and other high profile conservatives have already setup their own websites and ability to make money.

I personally agree that a private company should be able to set what rules they want. In a free market companies sink or swim on the decisions they make. So it is up to YT users to decide if they want to continue on the site or move to another platform.

The only point I'm making is that YT come up with rules and then apply them retrospectively, via a bot that takes out more innocent videos than the ones its supposed to be targetting.

 

[Roar87]

If you have complaints about YouTube's terms of service, I suggest you take them to YouTube.

Thanks mate, I don't think Youtube will listen to random internet user, there's a debate to be had on the issue though quite clearly. Youtube is effectively a monopoly when it comes to sharing videos online, they bought out all their rivals, paid content providers to move to their 'free open platform', then when the competition was dead they've taken on all the advertisers to rake in the profit and decided they're no longer a free open platform.

 

[i-bert]

The fact of the matter is that YouTube with their existing ToCs and policies are by far and away the largest of their kind.

That kind of indicates that the majority of people are perfectly happy with the way it works for them. The only people who could get upset are, by definition, at the extreme.

That's because the world is heading towards the left, and anyone not happy with this are now considered "extreme" right, when in fact they are just normal people who care about logic and a fair world.

 

[wesimmo]

That's because the world is heading towards the left, and anyone not happy with this are now considered "extreme" right, when in fact they are just normal people who care about logic and a fair world.

Again, by definition, if the majority of world is moving to the left (your claim) then you're actually abnormal.

 

[Thecaferacer]

That's because the world is heading towards the left, and anyone not happy with this are now considered "extreme" right, when in fact they are just normal people who care about logic and a fair world.

It could be argued the world isn't going left, it's going centre right (ignoring the Arab and African states) and it's a small minority trying to force far left ideology on a predominantly centrist population that's causing the rub.