The Law Freedom of Speech

(Log in to remove this ad.)

WA ROO

FSB 5th Directorate
Joined
Oct 7, 2003
Posts
15,169
Likes
9,130
Location
Lubyanka Square
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Red Devil Sport Club
Biased towards cash.
I wouldn't expect morality forms much (if any) basis for their business decisions They'd have boffins crunching the numbers.
By deleting channels with over 600k subscribers???
Vids with over 100k views?

Doesn't sound like a business decision
 

WA ROO

FSB 5th Directorate
Joined
Oct 7, 2003
Posts
15,169
Likes
9,130
Location
Lubyanka Square
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Red Devil Sport Club
Nobody claimed they were nazis.

I provided examples that disprove your statement about them being biased against right wingers.
As I said
Their have successfully fought their case to youtube

Yet the like of PragerU are shadowbanned
Just another group of Nazis hey


Why don't you use your old name?
Are you ashamed and embarrassed by it?
 

Mofra

Moderator
Joined
Dec 6, 2005
Posts
40,648
Likes
100,936
Location
Footscray
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Footscray, The Exers
Moderator #936
By deleting channels with over 600k subscribers???
Vids with over 100k views?

Doesn't sound like a business decision
They would balance that with the number of people who would boycott You-Tube is those channels weren't taken down.

It's not an uncommon consideration.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

WA ROO

FSB 5th Directorate
Joined
Oct 7, 2003
Posts
15,169
Likes
9,130
Location
Lubyanka Square
AFL Club
Gold Coast
Other Teams
Red Devil Sport Club
They would balance that with the number of people who would boycott You-Tube is those channels weren't taken down.

It's not an uncommon consideration.
So they bow down to the regressive left hate mob
Good to see their mass flagging tactic is working
 

kranky al

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Posts
14,518
Likes
17,124
Location
Greenough
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
east perth www.pixelpac.com.au
A lot get banned or their videos removed. There isnt much freedom of speech on Youtube unless you are from the left side of politics

You mentioned once you have your own Youtube channel. What is the name of it?
If you are from the right wing - and your channel espouses free market policies, is against welfare etc etc

You wont have a problem - your channel will go on forever

If on the other hand you espouse racism or hate speech - a private company - whos terms and conditions disallow hate speech and racism are perfectly entitled to delete your account.

Its not rocket surgery.

Now seeing as part of almost every left wing manifesto ive ever seen is about the equality of man and is against hating on minority groups - theres your answer.


Now i dont know if there is any hardcore russian commies from the 70’s on youtube - but they were very anti gay back then - if they are still out there and spruiking that gay people should be gulaged - they are also at risk of having their channel deleted - if however all they did was whine about how much better things were under uncle nik kruschev - they’d be fine.

Its not about right wing vs left wing - its hate speech.


You would have to be a completely ignorant imbecilic sausage knot to misunderstand this.
 

Chief

110% sass!
Joined
Dec 1, 1999
Posts
73,422
Likes
43,456
Location
Brisbane
AFL Club
Carlton
Admin #943
My position is that youtube is biased towards the regressive left
The channel deletions,shadow bans and vid deletions prove this


Why don't you use your old name?
Are you ashamed and embarrassed by it?
Have you ever posted anything without personal sniping? Please link and I will print the post out and frame it.
 

CheapCharlie

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Posts
4,554
Likes
4,783
AFL Club
Sydney
If you are from the right wing - and your channel espouses free market policies, is against welfare etc etc

You wont have a problem - your channel will go on forever

If on the other hand you espouse racism or hate speech - a private company - whos terms and conditions disallow hate speech and racism are perfectly entitled to delete your account.

Its not rocket surgery.

Now seeing as part of almost every left wing manifesto ive ever seen is about the equality of man and is against hating on minority groups - theres your answer.


Now i dont know if there is any hardcore russian commies from the 70’s on youtube - but they were very anti gay back then - if they are still out there and spruiking that gay people should be gulaged - they are also at risk of having their channel deleted - if however all they did was whine about how much better things were under uncle nik kruschev - they’d be fine.

Its not about right wing vs left wing - its hate speech.


You would have to be a completely ignorant imbecilic sausage knot to misunderstand this.
It isnt as simple as you would like it to be

Often bannings occur and then hate speech is invoked as the justification for the heavy handedness. Hate speech itself is a constantly moving line in society, and often depends who is administering or interpreting guidelines

Social media platform bannings are nearly always the banning of commentators on the right of politics. Some of those deserve some time on the sidelines, but most are penalised for minor and debatable infractions. The threat of suspension and deletion of an account is enough in itself to stifle free speech and have people moderating and self censoring what they say to avoid being banned.
That in itself is stopping free speech

But the hypocrisy is often evident.
White person says something hateful about blacks.
Black person says something hateful against whites.
Both examples can be cited as individually/combination of hate speech, bigotry, racism, yet typically only the white group will be classified as hate speech and receive a banning from whatever platform or be de-monitised. Being de-monitised can be similar to being banned.

Similarly
A guy says all women are whores
A woman says all guys are rapists
Both are examples of hate speech misandry/mysogny, most would agree
Yet it will be the man who is accused of hate speech and banned, not the woman.

So it isn't so simple to say don't do hate speech, because the lines of what is hate speech are movable depending on Gender/ethnicity/politics of moderators for social media giants

The private company line has been used many times but the likes of platforms such as Twitter, Google, Youtube, Facebooks , etctaera , are predatory monopolies and competition against them is almost impossible at this time.
So , while they are private (or public companies), they are in effect a public service for most people.
 

kranky al

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Posts
14,518
Likes
17,124
Location
Greenough
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
east perth www.pixelpac.com.au
It isnt as simple as you would like it to be

Often bannings occur and then hate speech is invoked as the justification for the heavy handedness. Hate speech itself is a constantly moving line in society, and often depends who is administering or interpreting guidelines

Social media platform bannings are nearly always the banning of commentators on the right of politics. Some of those deserve some time on the sidelines, but most are penalised for minor and debatable infractions. The threat of suspension and deletion of an account is enough in itself to stifle free speech and have people moderating and self censoring what they say to avoid being banned.
That in itself is stopping free speech

But the hypocrisy is often evident.
White person says something hateful about blacks.
Black person says something hateful against whites.
Both examples can be cited as individually/combination of hate speech, bigotry, racism, yet typically only the white group will be classified as hate speech and receive a banning from whatever platform or be de-monitised. Being de-monitised can be similar to being banned.

Similarly
A guy says all women are whores
A woman says all guys are rapists
Both are examples of hate speech misandry/mysogny, most would agree
Yet it will be the man who is accused of hate speech and banned, not the woman.

So it isn't so simple to say don't do hate speech, because the lines of what is hate speech are movable depending on Gender/ethnicity/politics of moderators for social media giants

The private company line has been used many times but the likes of platforms such as Twitter, Google, Youtube, Facebooks , etctaera , are predatory monopolies and competition against them is almost impossible at this time.
So , while they are private (or public companies), they are in effect a public service for most people.
Do these things actually happen - or do you just think they do because the sites you read keep telling you they happen?

Case in point:

<<<In the wake of a terrorist attack in London earlier this month, a U.S. congressman wrote a Facebook post in which he called for the slaughter of “radicalized” Muslims. “Hunt them, identify them, and kill them,” declared U.S. Rep. Clay Higgins, a Louisiana Republican. “Kill them all. For the sake of all that is good and righteous. Kill them all.”
Higgins’ plea for violent revenge went untouched by Facebook workers who scour the social network deleting offensive speech.
But a May posting on Facebook by Boston poet and Black Lives Matter activist Didi Delgado drew a different response.
“All white people are racist. Start from this reference point, or you’ve already failed,” Delgado wrote. The post was removed and her Facebook account was disabled for seven days.>>>


Source: https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwin2ILD8cnhAhXKdn0KHQzGDl8QzPwBegQIARAC&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.propublica.org%2Farticle%2Ffacebook-hate-speech-censorship-internal-documents-algorithms&psig=AOvVaw146LqUkHARHCugGrJv-Xry&ust=1555135553090685
 

Soft Downhill Skier

2008-2010 wasn't me.
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Posts
34,524
Likes
27,367
AFL Club
GWS
The private company line has been used many times but the likes of platforms such as Twitter, Google, Youtube, Facebooks , etctaera , are predatory monopolies and competition against them is almost impossible at this time.
So , while they are private (or public companies), they are in effect a public service for most people.
Why haven't the likes of Watson, Pool, Southern, Molyneux and plenty of others been banned?

And in regards to competition, many banned from social media platforms have migrated to Gab. Have you had a look at what that is all about?
 
Top Bottom