Posted on 12/08/2016 7:39:08 AM PST by Non-Compliant_Deplorable
"I don’t know how to begin to write about what I consider to be a turning point on the restriction of free speech on our precious Internet. I just discovered that YouTube has censored some videos of one of the best citizen journalists on the Net: David Seaman. He is one of the most reputable and honorable journalists on YouTube…I will mourn the loss of his material and the assault on our First Amendment Rights. So be it…God is in control, and He will guide those of us who trust Him..."
(Excerpt) Read more at investmentwatchblog.com ...
It was in the 40’s, I read an article a few years back detailing it, I can’t seem to find the Penalties incurred anymore when searching the Internet, But I am Positive a few went to PRISON
Why can’t Google just hang a Trigger Warning on the videos that it does not like, and call it a day.
I’m not sure if that is a good idea. An individual company doing it is one thing, but a whole group of companies doing it together could have potential First Amendment implications.
... I mean, because they are still selling eyeballs to advertisers. And eyeballs that aren’t being gratuitously offended (this is a two way street ya know) will be friendlier customers.
If I ran You Tube, I’d have users indicate their preference: Lefty, Righty, Don’t Care, No Sex, No Islam, etc. And anything that didn’t fit the filter would have a warning tag on it, but could still be accessed by clicking through the warning. That would give me the maximum number of eyeballs to sell without offending them too much.
Ok, it was a long time ago.... before my time
I think there was also a similar situation among glass manufacturers that were prosecuted for rice fixing. It resulted in little books with list prices for every inch in length and width that were discounted at the time of sale. That was the Late 40’s I think
Not fake news. Yes, you can get to PragerU videos, but Youtube has limited who can see certain videos.
Check this out:
https://www.prageru.com/stop-youtube-blocking-prageru-videos
YouTube currently lists 18 PragerU videos— over 10 percent of our entire collection—under “restricted mode.”
Many families enable restricted mode in order to keep inappropriate and objectionable adult and sexual content away from their children—not to prevent them from watching animated, age-appropriate, educational videos.
ADD YOUR NAME TO THIS PETITION, AND TELL YOUTUBE TO STOP BLOCKING PRAGERU VIDEOS.
Here’s a list of the 18 videos we request YouTube remove immediately from restricted mode:
Born to Hate Jews
What Should We Do About Guns?
Are The Police Racist?
Why Don’t Feminists Fight for Muslim Women?
Why Did America Fight the Korean War?
Who’s More Pro-Choice: Europe or America?
What ISIS Wants
Why Are There Still Palestinian Refugees?
Islamic Terror: What Muslim Americans Can Do
Did Bush Lie About Iraq?
Who NOT to Vote For
Israel: The World’s Most Moral Army
Radical Islam: The Most Dangerous Ideology
The Most Important Question About Abortion
What is the University Diversity Scam?
He Wants You
Israel’s Legal Founding
Pakistan: Can Sharia and Freedom Coexist?
In response to an official complaint we filed, Google specialists defended their restriction of our videos, and said, “We don’t censor anyone”, although they do “take into consideration what the intent of the video is” and “what the focus of the video is.”
There is no excuse for Google and YouTube censoring and restricting any PragerU videos, which are produced with the sole intent of educating people of all ages about America’s founding values.
I didn’t know about Prager being hit also. They do good stuff. Very, very concerning.
This is going to be antitrust.... businesses can not collude together to fix prices so business can not collude together to deny services( ie service at no price)
Let not shoot ourself in the foot saying
“oh well we’re conservative libertarian believe businesses should have the right to do what they want”
This is not just one business trying to turn down your business
This is all the businesses in the market coming together to freeze you out of the market and see that no one provides you service
This is not just one business not selling to the “black guy” but het can go some were else.... its all the businesses coming together and trying to stop any one selling to the “black guy”
When are people going to get it through their thick skulls that a private entity censoring or removing your commentary from their forum isn’t infringement of first amendment rights?!?!
No, no no, w solved that by turning the function of net addresses control to the UN. All they want to do is stop hate speech and fake news.
It really chaps their as*es that conservatives can share their views on the Internet.
Let not shoot ourself in the foot saying
“oh well we’re conservative libertarian believe businesses should have the right to do what they want”
This is not just one business trying to turn down your business
This is all the businesses in the market coming together to freeze you out of the market and see that no one provides you service
This is not just one business not selling to the “black guy” but het can go some were else.... its all the businesses coming together and trying to stop any one selling to the “black guy”
Well put.
All the businesses are willingly colluding, at the behest of the UN and European countries from what I have heard.
Wrongo.
BAN SOFTWARE PATENTS
Censorship has zero to do with websites or the internet.
Facebook is granted an abusive monopoly on relations and Google a monopoly on videos.
SOLUTION: Remove or dilute their “software patents”. Software is numbers and numbers are not patentable. Nothing hard or concrete exists.
Now class, in unison, whenever news about Youtube, Facebook, Google, or Microsoft is posted,
repeat after me ...
ban Software Patents!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.