YouTube deletes Natural News channel: Victory against pseudoscience, or conservative purge?

[HIMBOB]

"the tyrants in charge are left-wing lunatics who are, without exception, totalitarians who despise dissenting views. "

Irony in its simplest form.

Well actually seeing it's ironic in two separate ways it's perhaps it's most concentrated form.

 

[Tekk]

Twitter deleted thousands of bot accounts .Conservatives cried they were being censored despite the fact that several iberal tweeters posted that they had also lost followers during the purge .

 

[luckyshot]

How about ones claiming he's literally Hitler or a Nazi?

Believe it or not, there are none.

Hitler died in 1945. Trump was born in 1946. They are not the same person. There are some similarities between the two... but, as far as I am aware, no one has claimed that the two are in fact literally one person...

... as opposed to many popular right wing nuts who literally claim that Barack Obama was born in Kenya, was Muslim, engaged in philia, arranged the Sandy Hook massacre, etc.

"Literally" is the operative word here, and I'm glad you introduced it into the conversation. Left wingers may have some incorrect or dubious value judgment or claims. But right wingers are far more likely to spread information that is literally made up fake news... That's probably why they are more likely to get banned.

 

[Squarechoke]

Libs are totalitarians who despise dissenting views. Can't be going around denying things they say are true or else ban hammer. Happens everywhere libs are in charge, even the war room does it.

That's some great irony at work there.

 

[FinalFight]

Man... Youtube needs to delete all these dudes that cry about meat eaters, fake weights and who aint natty.

Vegan Gains needs his mother fucking ass whooped, I hate that guy and hope nothing but bad shit happens to him. Drop him spine first on a high curb.

Vegans gains trains ufc and bjj brah. Plus he's on the juice.

 

[Gregolian]

I don't watch much youtube, but I'm very cynical of this narrative.
I heard exactly the same thing about the demonetisation of videos, and that was clearly financially motivated. Funnily enough, when I looked I also found a bunch of left-wingers claiming it was a "progressive purge" due to Tim Black, David Packman and Jimmy Dore getting demonetised.
The American right, and especially the far right, thrives on their persecution complex of late.

I feel like YouTube as a whole has tanked in terms of quality since their monetization system moved to a more automated algorithm.

It's fucked over a ton of non-political channels that do shit like video game let's plays/reviews and then a couple gun channels like Military Arms Channel who just reviews shit had a video or two removed.

It's odd that it hasn't really happened to .22 Plinkster as much but he does trickshots with .22 rifles and shit more.

 

[Gregolian]

Vegans gains trains ufc and bjj brah. Plus he's on the juice.

Can't remember who it was out of Big Z, Hafthor, Shaw, Hall or one of those other maniac World's Strongest Man competitors that made a comment about supposed vegan bodybuilders/powerlifters:
"There's no way you can be vegan, do that, have gains, and be clean"

 

[MicroBrew]

Over at Amren, a popular WNist blog+forum, the proprietor is complaining of being censored by YouTube. Rather hypocritic considering his comments section is heavily moderated and only pro WNist articles are posted on the blog. Stormfront is also wining about YT censoring alt-right voices. Yet SF does not allow non-Whites to post in all but 2 subforums and posts are heavily moderated.

If I was in charge of YT, I would not censor Alex Jones, Alt-Right opinions, CT theories, Pseudo science claims etc..I would let anyone post anything with an exception made for clear threats. I would though ban all clickbait thumbnails.

I do hope YT does not hold-back in censorship, leading to people getting sick of YT . This may lead to other free video hosting sites gaining popularity. Google/YT is too dominant.

My perception has been that Anti-vaccine sentiments are found on both sides (right and left) of the political spectrum.

 

[lifelessheap]

Conservatives are masters of misinformation. No wonder they are fighting to spread fake news. How else would they convince millions of poor whites to support causes against their best interests

Are open borders and endless illegal immigration good for poor whites? Serious question.

 

[Bamboozled]

Conservatives are masters of misinformation. No wonder they are fighting to spread fake news. How else would they convince millions of poor whites to support causes against their best interests

You have been compromised.

 

[Thepaintbucket]

It boggles my mind why conservatives continue to use these services if they feel this way. Whatever happen to them saying it's a private business and they have the right to refuse service!!, motto? As long as they agree with why the owner is refusing, am I right? Selective enforcement.

The infamous cake lawsuit you say? Well.. yeah.. those people broke civil rights law by discriminating against them.. according to the supreme court.

There is no freedom of speech on Youtube or any privately owned forum.

Stick to your guns and use a different service.

 

[jamel]

Vegans gains trains ufc and bjj brah. Plus he's on the juice.

You can look at his mishapen head and tell he is juicing.

 

[Gutter Chris]

It boggles my mind why conservatives continue to use these services if they feel this way. Whatever happen to them saying it's a private business and they have the right to refuse service!!, motto? As long as they agree with why the owner is refusing, am I right? Selective enforcement.

Probably use it because google has worked themselves into being essential to modern communication and also saying why dont they create a new one if they dont like it is a line of shit Like the pick yourself up by your bootstraps line .

There is no freedom of speech on Youtube or any privately owned forum.

There should be, the first amendment should apply to things online as well. Online connections have to be built and all that will have an owner but it does not mean that it isnt a vital tool for how we speak to one another. We have already decided to allow corporations to run our country and things arent going so hot so perhaps we should put a safeguard or 2 in place before they start regulating who gets to say what when

I will say I dont expect results from the team that killed net neutrality and that it is kinda funny to see the guys that say that business should be allowed to do as they please run right smack dab into the reason why maybe that isnt such a hot idea

Probably use it because google has worked themself into being essential to modern communication and also saying why dont they create a new one if they dont like it is a line of shit and its the same reason telecoms don see a lot of competition

 

[7437]

Which is why an alternative to YouTube needs to be developed and pushed for conservatives, or whatever.

Conservatives arent big on developing things

 

[Thepaintbucket]

Probably use it because google has worked themselves into being essential to modern communication and also saying why dont they create a new one if they dont like it is a line of shit Like the pick yourself up by your bootstraps line .

Google search engine and said technologies are essential to modern communication? No, it isn't. That's ridiculous. The world wide web has been around a lot longer than Google. It's popular based on human choice. You and I choose to use Google. China's most popular search engine is Baidu btw.

There should should be, the first amendment should apply to things online as well. Online connections have to be built and all that will have an owner but it does not mean that it isnt a vital tool for how we speak to one another. We have already decided to allow corporations to run our country and things arent going so hot so perhaps we should put a safeguard or 2 in place before they start regulating who gets to say what when

I will say I dont expect results from the team that killed net neutrality and that it is kinda funny to see the guys that say that business should be allowed to do as they please run right smack dab into the reason why maybe that isnt such a hot idea

Probably use it because google has worked themself into being essential to modern communication and also saying why dont they create a new one if they dont like it is a line of shit and its the same reason telecoms don see a lot of competition

You might be confusing two concepts here. Free and open access to the internet and private platform rights. I agree, the internet should be available to access, free of censorship, within legal laws. But what does this have to do with private company rights? One is access to the internet and the other is a service over the internet. It's a huge difference.

When you say the first amendment, it essentially means the government shouldn't impose censorship over your rights as a citizen aka free speech. Again there is no free speech within a private business. Furthermore just because it's a popular platform does not mean it's vital to our communication freedoms.

Do you think you should be allowed to post whatever you want on Sherdog? Of course not. Whether there's 100 million users using the service or 50,000, the principles are the same.

I know this has been beaten to death on Sherdog but I still have yet to be given a reasonable answer from people who believe they should have freedom of speech on Youtube, Google, etc.

How do you purpose we resolve this issue? Youtube is a business and they are doing what they feel like is in their best interest. Shall our government take over Google by force so that you can post whatever you want on Youtube?

 

[irish_thug]

It's always struck me as strange that in the US this sort of pseudoscience and CT is associated with the right.
Over here this is something I've always associated with the left.

I always associate it with lunatics.

 

[Byron Carter]

Libs are totalitarians who despise dissenting views. Can't be going around denying things they say are true or else ban hammer. Happens everywhere libs are in charge, even the war room does it.

 

[jefferz]

Probably use it because google has worked themselves into being essential to modern communication and also saying why dont they create a new one if they dont like it is a line of shit Like the pick yourself up by your bootstraps line .



There should be, the first amendment should apply to things online as well. Online connections have to be built and all that will have an owner but it does not mean that it isnt a vital tool for how we speak to one another. We have already decided to allow corporations to run our country and things arent going so hot so perhaps we should put a safeguard or 2 in place before they start regulating who gets to say what when

I will say I dont expect results from the team that killed net neutrality and that it is kinda funny to see the guys that say that business should be allowed to do as they please run right smack dab into the reason why maybe that isnt such a hot idea

Probably use it because google has worked themself into being essential to modern communication and also saying why dont they create a new one if they dont like it is a line of shit and its the same reason telecoms don see a lot of competition

Ok, let's say Youtube is forced to allow any video on their platform. We've already seen advertisers pull out in mass over concerns of what videos their ads are being played on. If the remaining advertisers pull out due to the content of videos, how does youtube make money? If it's not making money, how does youtube pay it's creators? How does the platform survive?

An example of someone being unhappy with youtube and starting there own video hosting service is Linus Tech Tips. They've been working on their platform for about a year and half, they're now in Alpha. If a small 6 person team with a limited budget can do it, people like Alex Jones should be able to have someone make a video hosting service for them easily.

 

[Byron Carter]

Ok, let's say Youtube is forced to allow any video on their platform. We've already seen advertisers pull out in mass over concerns of what videos their ads are being played on. If the remaining advertisers pull out due to the content of videos, how does youtube make money? If it's not making money, how does youtube pay it's creators? How does the platform survive?

An example of someone being unhappy with youtube and starting there own video hosting service is Linus Tech Tips. They've been working on their platform for about a year and half, they're now in Alpha. If a small 6 person team with a limited budget can do it, people like Alex Jones should be able to have someone make a video hosting service for them easily.

You're telling me one of the biggest tech companies in history can't solve how to fix a problem like that?

Get the fuck out of here.

TV has had targeted advertising for like 60 years. Let the advertisers decide what their ads are played on.

 

[MicroBrew]

Ok, let's say Youtube is forced to allow any video on their platform. We've already seen advertisers pull out in mass over concerns of what videos their ads are being played on. If the remaining advertisers pull out due to the content of videos, how does youtube make money? If it's not making money, how does youtube pay it's creators? How does the platform survive?

An example of someone being unhappy with youtube and starting there own video hosting service is Linus Tech Tips. They've been working on their platform for about a year and half, they're now in Alpha. If a small 6 person team with a limited budget can do it, people like Alex Jones should be able to have someone make a video hosting service for them easily.

What about Dailymotion.com ? They are an alternative to YouTube.