pendragon1
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 7, 2000
- Messages
- 52,029
care to post the source of that possible misconception? I haven't seen anyone here defending white nationalist, other than their 1a rights.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
YouTube Cracks Down on Far-Right Videos as Conspiracy Theories Spread
- Thread starter Megalith
- Start date
- Status
Zion Halcyon
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2007
- Messages
- 2,108
*Sigh*
Leftists will fail to recognize the slippery slope here. Shit like this is how massive censorship like in China starts. One side feels they are somehow morally superior to the other side, and therefore justify to themselves all sorts of freedom-restricting actions to the point where they look at the Orwell book 1984 as an instruction manual rather than the cautionary tale it was meant to be.
The thing they miss is that once the dissent is effectively silenced, they become next - because in the end they are just useful idiots and a means to an end. One only needs to look most recently at Venezuela to see how it plays out.
Leftists will fail to recognize the slippery slope here. Shit like this is how massive censorship like in China starts. One side feels they are somehow morally superior to the other side, and therefore justify to themselves all sorts of freedom-restricting actions to the point where they look at the Orwell book 1984 as an instruction manual rather than the cautionary tale it was meant to be.
The thing they miss is that once the dissent is effectively silenced, they become next - because in the end they are just useful idiots and a means to an end. One only needs to look most recently at Venezuela to see how it plays out.
Zion Halcyon
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2007
- Messages
- 2,108
One additional point - these "far right" sites - many aren't "far right". Conservative yes, but not extremist in the least. Most of them you could say are "Pro Trump", but not engaging in any sort of hate speech or the like.
No, the potential real reason for this throttling is that the Inspector General report is about to drop, and Social Media is trying to get ahead of it to censor it by hitting the outlets most likely to report on it.
In it, supposedly it details historic FISA abuses by the previous administration to willingly spy on American Citizens using known false information, even pre-dating the Trump campaign. Its going to make Watergate look like shoplifting.
Both parties will get hit hard, but the Obama Administration the most, and prosecutions will be recommended. In fact, cases have already been investigated for a while now, and we may see this coming to a head.
Just look at how Jeff Sessions took out the KKK - he's silent, looking like he's doing nothing, until he has an air-tight case and rolls EVERYONE up at once.
Some heads are going to spin, some leftists with dreams of a Trump impeachment are going to have a VERY bad day, and social media will already have in place algorithms to restrict all the sites most likely to report this under their thumb.
No, the potential real reason for this throttling is that the Inspector General report is about to drop, and Social Media is trying to get ahead of it to censor it by hitting the outlets most likely to report on it.
In it, supposedly it details historic FISA abuses by the previous administration to willingly spy on American Citizens using known false information, even pre-dating the Trump campaign. Its going to make Watergate look like shoplifting.
Both parties will get hit hard, but the Obama Administration the most, and prosecutions will be recommended. In fact, cases have already been investigated for a while now, and we may see this coming to a head.
Just look at how Jeff Sessions took out the KKK - he's silent, looking like he's doing nothing, until he has an air-tight case and rolls EVERYONE up at once.
Some heads are going to spin, some leftists with dreams of a Trump impeachment are going to have a VERY bad day, and social media will already have in place algorithms to restrict all the sites most likely to report this under their thumb.
When's the last time that worked?
- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 55,601
General Patton would have spelled it correctly.
EchtoGammut
2[H]4U
- Joined
- May 7, 2007
- Messages
- 4,055
People love conflating two separate issues. First off as repetitively mentioned Youtube is a corporate owned platform, they can pretty much do what they want. There is a definite issue with our largest public platforms for voicing political speech being owned by corporations. I have no idea what to do about it, but it something that we as a nation will eventually need to discuss.
The second issue is Youtube's absolute fuck up when it comes to managing their platform. First they claim to be developing an algorithm to combat all the shit on their site, but despite publishing metrics about their success, they fail to take down the most obvious violators. Rather than building their machine learning code on a parallel thread and checking the output to verify accuracy, they immediately release it on the live platform and tell everyone mis-labled "oops". It is clear from this action that Youtube does not view its contributors as partners, rather as people who should feel lucky Youtube shares revenue at all. Now, they hire live people to scan the site and let them work on production before they have been fully trained. I honestly don't know what the fuck all those people working at Youtube do all day. As an experiment I wrote a really basic tensor flow pattern matching algorithm based on meta data (keywords and typography) that a lot of these sites that should be banned use. I was able to achieve better than 85% success within about an hour. If I can do this while bored, what the hell are thousands of idiots doing all day other than hanging out in the cafeteria?
The second issue is Youtube's absolute fuck up when it comes to managing their platform. First they claim to be developing an algorithm to combat all the shit on their site, but despite publishing metrics about their success, they fail to take down the most obvious violators. Rather than building their machine learning code on a parallel thread and checking the output to verify accuracy, they immediately release it on the live platform and tell everyone mis-labled "oops". It is clear from this action that Youtube does not view its contributors as partners, rather as people who should feel lucky Youtube shares revenue at all. Now, they hire live people to scan the site and let them work on production before they have been fully trained. I honestly don't know what the fuck all those people working at Youtube do all day. As an experiment I wrote a really basic tensor flow pattern matching algorithm based on meta data (keywords and typography) that a lot of these sites that should be banned use. I was able to achieve better than 85% success within about an hour. If I can do this while bored, what the hell are thousands of idiots doing all day other than hanging out in the cafeteria?
dgz
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2010
- Messages
- 5,838
The hypocrisy in this thread is astounding.
Some Most of you are really hate "other side" huh. Tribalism is not a double edge sword, it's an instrument of people who want to control you.
Reality
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2003
- Messages
- 1,937
actually, that isn't true at all. Tide pods.
with that said, I'm 100% against YouTube censoring videos based on validity of news. Since when did Facebook and YouTube become the arbiter of news worthiness? Those platforms need to be considered a utility, they serve way too many people worldwide to simply be considered a private service.
Exactly. If the principle "I disagree with what you say but will defend to the death your right to say it" holds BOTH ways...and ALL ways...then all must sign onto it. With their sacred honor (and of course their lives too).
It's real, not a concept. And it makes real demands of all of us, IMO
Johan Steyn
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2016
- Messages
- 85
Yip, it is infringement of free speech, no question about it. This will happen more and more.
Yes, and Youtube is a privately owned company, so they can totally tell you what can or cannot say on their property.
If you don't like it, go find somewhere else to get your daily dose of whatever youtube censors.
And I am pretty sure there are plenty of sites that offer just this kind of service.
Like... you do understand the difference between privately owned property and government owned property, right?
- Joined
- May 18, 1997
- Messages
- 55,601
exactly
dgingeri
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2004
- Messages
- 2,830
They've been doing that since long before this week. They went after PragerU months ago, claiming hate speech, for a video of a woman who had escaped Islam, and what she knew about Islam.
Gorankar
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,107
Then why isn't CNN banned?
NukeDukem
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2011
- Messages
- 2,659
Then why isn't CNN banned?
Lies and conspiracy theories are perfectly acceptable if they help bring down a duly elected (Republican) President. Hearsay from unidentified sources, half-truths, and pure conjecture now masquerade as "news", and who cares how much of it is merited? As long as they progress the left wing agenda of destroying the sovereignty of the nation, lies are both accepted and encouraged!
Because they're not on YT, they control their own network. How did you not know this??Then why isn't CNN banned?
Also they're not as far gone as Breitbart, Fox, AlterNet, etc. and are just merely a mediocre news source and don't do the sort of whole cloth manufacturing of conspiracy theories and conspiracy mongering that various Right "news" sources do.
If its resulting in indictments, charges, investigations, and prison time then its not lies or conspiracy theories.
Gorankar
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,107
https://www.youtube.com/user/CNN
Yeah, they are their own network, with a youtube account and more than a few videos that I would wager earn them revenue. And yeah, they are pretty far gone. A slow slide, starting in the 90's, pretty much all the way down the left slope to the point that they should be considered the propaganda arm of the left. For entertainment only at best. Yet they don't get the censor?
Youtube can do what youtube wants with youtube's site. I am fine with that, but don't try to pretend they are being fair or balanced about it. Don't try to pretend they don't have their own agenda to push.
NukeDukem
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2011
- Messages
- 2,659
Fabrications might be enough to launch investigations, they might be enough for rogue bureaucrats to secure surveillance warrants against their political enemies, but they'll need "evidence" for convictions and prison time.
Holy fuck the crazies have descended on this thread.
To the batshit liberal sjw crowd: learn what tolerance means and keep your damn mouths shut the next time a business refuses to serve liberals, blacks, gays, transgenders, women, asians, mexicans, etc.
To the "it's a 1st amendment issue" crowd: Think that one through, the first amendment protects speech from the government, not citizens or companies - they can't throw you in prison because you disagree with them.
If youtube wants to censor people on their platform, fine. Maybe the censorship by facebook, youtube, twitter, etc. will convince some conservatives to innovate and create a new platform for their content. Facebook is past-due to become the next myspace anyways.
To the batshit liberal sjw crowd: learn what tolerance means and keep your damn mouths shut the next time a business refuses to serve liberals, blacks, gays, transgenders, women, asians, mexicans, etc.
To the "it's a 1st amendment issue" crowd: Think that one through, the first amendment protects speech from the government, not citizens or companies - they can't throw you in prison because you disagree with them.
If youtube wants to censor people on their platform, fine. Maybe the censorship by facebook, youtube, twitter, etc. will convince some conservatives to innovate and create a new platform for their content. Facebook is past-due to become the next myspace anyways.
Don't be obtuse.
Yes they have a "channel" on YT but your wanting them to be banned was without qualifiers.
All the news networks started to slide in the late 90's but not to same degree of say Fox and they're nowhere near as bad as cesspits of BS like Breitbart or Alex Jones.
LOL they let those scumbags spread their lies for years and they finally start to clamp down on them after numerous complaints so that means they have a "agenda"?
Gonna need a citation for this agenda of theirs you're talking about. And no linking to conspiracy theory Right wing sites or shit tier blogs isn't a proper citation.
Banning people from their network who are spreading lies isn't the same as banning people for race or sexual orientation which are subject to legal protections in a court of law. hth
Gorankar
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,107
Obtuse? They are going after right wing sites only. That shows their agenda.
Intellectual dishonesty at it's best. You have fun with that.
bb_forrest
n00b
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2017
- Messages
- 38
Shitlary? Really? What are you? 3 years old?
Is this what passes for debate these days?
I've never understood tribalism, one side does not have all the right answers and the other side all the wrong answers, suggest you look at object vs subjective thinking
dangerouseddy
Gawd
- Joined
- May 16, 2007
- Messages
- 639
well youtube seem to be unsubscribing people without their knowledge, the jimmy dore show and York cardiology are ones I was mysteriously unsubbed from.
This doesn't look like a quality citation backing up your earlier claims of YT having a agenda.
When will you post it exactly?
I mean you seem to think you really know what you're talking about so it should be easy for you to produce quality evidence right?
Gorankar
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2000
- Messages
- 11,107
Cite what? Are you claiming they don't have an agenda? Are you claiming you don't. Everyone has an agenda. I have one, our actions point towards what they are. Silencing one point of view and leaving the other to do as they wish points towards theirs. I know what I am talking about do you? Do I care enough to type more than this for you?
I think you're confusing the word bias for agenda. They're not the same thing.
I for instance don't have an agenda at all. I do however strongly dislike the sorts of conspiracy types you'll find all over the Right and their various news sources and yeah I'm going to post about it in response to others in thread.
If you don't care then don't post in thread anymore. Simple right?
Taldren
Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2006
- Messages
- 521
So you are professing YOUR ideological "superiority" for the subjugation of a group and are going to make yourself immune to your own standards and not silence yourself? How very goggle of you.
Your fixation on what you call the "right-wing filth" completely undermines your argument. The hyper violent Alt-Left has done more the last few years then the so-called Alt-Right groups, often with MSNBC, NBC, CBS, CNN, ect covering it in the best possible light. Hell, those leftist orgs have caused mass riots ffs. They built up the whole "Hands Up Dont Shoot" lie so hard that they got their on-TV riot complete with burning buildings.
Yet, I don't hear about Alt-Left youtube channels going dark. That sort of double standard is dangerous.
There is no Alt-Left that is why.
The closest you can come are a few die hard 9/11 Truthers and weirdo Antivaxx Reikei types that virtually no one looks at or considers truthful at all. Hell most of them don't even vote Democratic, they're Green Party and they have no power at all.
The crappy Right conspiracy types on the other hand have a fairly large and dedicated audience who seem take those sources' word as gospel and HRC/Tea Party types in Congress they vote for actually have a little power.
And probably improve productivity in the process.
LOL. So in your world, there is no Anti-Fa, Maxine Waters, or Bar-bar Streisand? And the sky, what color is it?
N.B. "Bar-bar misspelling is nod to the orginis of the word "barbarian." (from Greek barbaros foreign, ignorant "because the language they spoke sounded to Greeks like gibberish represented by the sounds "bar..bar..")
The left isn't exactly a mirror image. I'd say there's 3 basic camps:
SJW left: the kind obsessed with identity politics, interested in censorship, generally the loudest segment by far
establishment left: most Democrat politicians and many voters, essentially act like moderate Republicans of the past on most issue, but more socially liberal
classical left: the Bernie Sanders / Jill Stein type crowd that are interested in traditional left views related to workers, environment, anti-corruption etc.
There's a lot of overlap between the SJW and establishment left, and the classical left is sick of both. Something like Antifa has almost no political influence on the left and isn't even brought up in the realm of discussion usually. The right has paid more attention to it than the left ever has. You could probably put it in the SJW category though.
kirbyrj
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2005
- Messages
- 30,693
That's the stupidest thing I've seen this week. I'd almost think it was sarcasm it was so stupid, except then you tried to explain yourself.
kidstechno3
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2016
- Messages
- 201
This has gone horribly off-topic, but let me just say I'm laughing my ass off at these extreme right wingers crying about "muh free speech" and "muh censorship" when the republican party's own president openly criticizes free speech, suppresses news, lies his ass off, and praises the same dictators and regimes you claim America will fall into with these policies.
Clean your own glass house before throwing stones at others.
Clean your own glass house before throwing stones at others.
SilverSliver
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2004
- Messages
- 12,523
fakenews
Again, crazy leftists claim defending the second amendment, criticizing corporate monopoly on speech, or liking a President are grounds for extremism and censorship. Some go as far as calling, publicly, for the right to just 'die off.'
You're forgetting to mention that he's now hoping that America will follow in China's footsteps and elect a President (I bet he hopes it's him) for life instead of just a 4 year term like we have now.
SilverSliver
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2004
- Messages
- 12,523
Tell a joke and crazy leftists jump on it as their latest excuse to exterminate conservatives.
It's funny how you're referring to Hilary Clinton as Shitlary, but yet it's your President that's acting like one big pile of shit since he's been in office. You say say you've never seen videos about Trump and why Hilary is bad, yet there has been reports by every intelligence agency in the US that has stated Russians have posted ads attacking Hilary Clinton and other Presidential candidates in order to make Puppet boy look good.
They're there but they're not Alt-Left.
The term Alt-Left itself is a BS branding by some idiots on the Right. It has nothing to do with reality.
Alt-Right is a self branding by those who wanted to present themselves as Conservatives/Neo-Cons but without the image and propaganda of the old GOP (ie. guys like Milo, Baked Alaska, and the Crying Nazi).
Some things you don't joke about ever as President.
Also given the way the guy constantly keeps saying stupid/terrible things and then trying to play them off as a joke its a doubly idiotic thing to say.
How do you know he was joking? If you haven't been paying attention, or are just blindly ignoring all of the signs that show just what type of person your child-in-chief really is then I feel sorry for you because that is exactly the type of thing he hopes to aspire to as he'd be following in China's footsteps and his boyfriend's (Putin's) footsteps as well.
- Status