LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksRead more.Says this is an extension of its policy to remove the promotion of harmful remedies.
Read more.Says this is an extension of its policy to remove the promotion of harmful remedies.
while this is at a first glance a good thing, how does youtube clasify what information is good and what is bad? does youtube hold medical knowledge so that they can judge the truth?
this will be another censorship to not be able to speak what you think and only hear the "official" info.
Does that also mean they're going to stop app the crap about flat earth and such?
While I agree with yeeman about classifying what's good/bad/true/lie, and freedom of information and stuff, IF people weren't so stupid and believed everything that certain sites told them then we wouldn't have to manage or censor certain things, but the internet gives crazy people an audience, which in turn creates more crazy people, so, while as a whole internet censorship is bad, if people weren't such idiots, we wouldn't need it...
I suggest you read the actual article before you remove all doubt of a certain characterisation of yourself:Originally Posted by yeeeeman
To get to this stage, where it can draw a clear line in the sand, YouTube has consulted closely with local health authorities and the WHO.
I do agree with taking down videos that are extremistic and that instill violence in people.
I do agree with taking down any kind of malicious video, even though it is very hard to say exactly what video is malicious and what not.
Thing is, we live in a world where no one really knows who is saying the truth and who is not.
Just as a short opinion, the pandemic does look like a legit thing, the virus is affecting people and killing some of them. But, there are so many things about this pandemic that really don't add up. There are so many dubious actions and the information is so simplified that you really wonder what is this all about.
If a person that works say in a medical lab and uses a spectometer, uploads a video on youtube and gives you the full content of the vaccine, does that video need to be taken down?
To me, the "fact checkers" are actually content and sites that makes you think these guys are considering us some brainless plants. I don't give a crap about what a fact checker or WHO or CDC says. I want to see the full spectrum of information, good and bad. I do have the right to see whatever I want, so censorship for the "good" of mankind is like the political police during communistic regimes that are there to silence anyone that says anything otherwise.
If the current generation of people, and that is my sentiment, doesn't really find this a problem, then you are free to support the consequences. Censorship should not be allowed at all, except for some clear bad things like pornography. But we're not talking about that here, we're talking about a medical situation where people should get informed before taking a decision. And so if you censorship all the "non agreeable" content then how can you take an informed decision?
Anyways, I see this as a move in the bad direction.
PsyaNyde (01-10-2021)
You have the right to see whatever you want, Youtube et al have the right to specify what is the minimum acceptability of the content on their distribution platform.
Unrestricted information leads to idiots whom have a global reach like Trump and Alex Jones (two examples off the top of my head) who have an immense following and their platform is being used to spread malicious and false information. The masses like to consume hyperbolic, sensationalised and dramaticised information so when they are given an information on how it is meant to be presented which is as plain fact, no emotion and as little bias as possible, these masses don't want to consume it for a variety of reasons.
There is an unhealthy and healthy censorship, you can still find the utter garbage that leads to anti-vax, climate change denial and flat earth opinions. But you have to remember Youtube is well within its rights to speak to people who work in the field, are experts and have dedicated their lives in the pursuit of the truth and how that truth can change based on new research and new information and use their immense distribution to help prevent the spread of bad information. Instead of people who are sensationalist, hyperbolic parasites of humanity whose "research" consists of speaking with absolute confidence where they will make a statement, hold fast to it regardless of what others say they can drive focus on properly research focused people whom have actually done something more than decided they want their time in the spotlight.
There is nothing more stupid than "people are fed up of listening to scientists", utterly ridiculous.
Last edited by Tabbykatze; 30-09-2021 at 01:27 PM.
chrism (30-09-2021)
Good. The more dangerous videos get stopped the better. While it is fine to have discussion and information what is not allowed is plain wrong propaganda. These channels owners know how to take snippets of other videos and small pieces of flawed studies and stick them together just to con others and it needs to stop. People are dying of a disease you can get a free vaccine for and its all down to misinformation. I remember when I got on the internet back in ~1997 and I found so much useful info. I thought the internet would be a new age of learning but instead it just turns out lots of people just don't have the critical learning skills that allow them to distinguish discussion from propaganda.
I still constantly hope education can improve to stop this but I've seen no sign of it so far (And I think you will always have a low educated portion of your population). I think banning is the only answer to saving lives in the short term.
I would 75% of the customers I have spoken to, they always talk about some conspiracy. So where I agree with taking it down, no one as in normal man in the street know's what is going on.
Maybe it's the aliens that's doing it lol.
JABULANI NONKE
Whomever pays them, will pick what is right and what is wrong. Done. They are, of course, a business.
Well in short all those that deny and refuse and is against Vaccines in general, only focus on the bad side of the matter and does not weight the pros and cons at all, it is simple as that, that creates misinformation, which is a bad thing, likewise they end getting a horde of followers that includes people where it would actually be recommended or actually lifesaving no matter any of the minor chances for any problems that may or can occur.
That is misinformation, as in any actual place that talk about the vaccines, real doctors and eksperts, actually show the known pros and cons giving people more than a choice, that is information, and that is something you can chose to do.
If you swear off the vaccines for eg. refusing at work, where it can be a requirement, then they can just to that swear off list add quite a bunch of common medicines and drugs, you would need to swear off as well, which contradict around 99% of what any anti-vaxxer say about Covid-19 and the vaccine.
It is stuff like that, you need to take into consideration, and hipocrites we got enough of already, and that is why these media really need to step up to have a clean platform, where you actually fact check or actually showing both sides of the coin more, in worst case scenario these media could get sued for allowing lifetreathening misinformation to happen if people here and there die from it and their relatives can prove they read it through Twitter or Facebook or saw some fake selfproclaimed doctor in a video on youtube.
Why is pornography clearly a bad thing but anti vax views are not. Your position is untenable. If you're arguing people should be able to make their own minds based on info they see should the same not apply to porn. If not, who gets to decide what is censored and what isn't? You? If so, congratulations you've just become what you've criticised youtube/Google for doing.
chrism (30-09-2021)
It's a dilemma really. With such censorship, you're basically telling sceptics that they're right not to trust officials. It can also encourage people not to think for themselves (which let's be honest is increasingly apparent) because they can just regurgitate what they've heard and just assume it to be true since we can now rely on big tech to decide what is valid instead of our initiatives. At the same time people listen more to feelings than information so you can't really trust people to make the right call. Personally I think covid has been heavily politicised and that both sceptics and people promoting the vaccines are both manipulating people's emotions to feel in a way they want them to feel and that has resulting in polarisation. Both sides consider the other side to be ignorant.
I have little hope for the future. We don't respect one another as much as we like to think so.
YT banning RT Germany because of covid was highly dubious (it was one interview with a single scientist and no you cant trust reporting from all western sources these days), the banks in Germany suddenly decided to stop processing RT's finances indicating a coordinated attack.
This is what's happening in the west, outright censorship with the appearances of protecting free speech, anything the liberal establishment deems wrong think gets de-platformed, its finances cut off, paypal has a political hit list that will auto ban anyone it doesn't like etc including reasonable political dissenters.
Youtube slides further and further into the dark side.
YT has become a political pawn of western powers and corporate media.
PsyaNyde (01-10-2021)
This is never going to be a straight-forward issue. On the one hand, publishers and media are going to be the bad guys if they act because .... censorship=bad, free speech=good arguments. On the other hand, they're going to be the bad guys if they don't act because ... spreading harmful misinformation.
Damned if they do, damned if they don't.
It's worth bearing in mind that just about every other publisher/media organisation applies censorship pretty much daily, and that means everybody from the local village newletter to the BBC or other global outlets.
Why? Everything from laws to their sense of what's right. And yes, in both cases, they have to decide how to interpret the laws they have to follow, and decide what they believe is right. How do they do it? Millions of editorial decisions.
The difference is often that with those organisations the public never sees it because what they censor never gets out. With social media, they're hosting the platform not creating the content.
While YT, FB etc making "censoring" decisions makes me somewhat uneasy, the reality is it's probably better that they do than when they don't, especially in the case of clear factual misrepresentations and the potential for those misrepresentations to be harmful to public health and even potentially cost lives.
The good thing is at least they're being pretty open about doing it. Better that than doing it in secret.
A lesson learned from PeterB about dignity in adversity, so Peter, In Memorium, "Onwards and Upwards".
Pure censorship, You Tube are just puppets for the Global elite to control and promote their propaganda.
PsyaNyde (01-10-2021)
We are facing a real problem with the power of the media. While false anti-vaccine information is certainly dangerous, the danger of giving too much power to the media has been made abundantly clear in the wake of Covid Hysteria.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
