Posted on 06/11/2019 5:44:25 AM PDT by magellan
"And so we are bringing that same notion [from Google] and approach to YouTube, so that we can rank higher quality stuff better and really prevent borderline content content which doesnt exactly violate policies, which need to be removed, but which can still cause harm."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.grabien.com ...
Total Orwellian Animal Farm: All animals are equal (i.e., policies), but some animals are more equal than others (borderline->banning).
The same thing has been happening on Twitter and Facebook, but Jack and Zuckerberg have never fessed up to censoring, banning, or shadowbanning based on anything other than their policies. They always claim such bans when the poster does not violate the policies to be "mistakes". Google has taken this a step further. There are their official policies, and their are their opinions. The much smaller Patreon started this over a year ago when they started banning people who had not violated their policies simply because they did not like them.
Conservatives, libertarians, classical liberals, populists, and firebrands are going to have to find another path. The big social media and Internet search players are not it.
It will be hard. Completely open, absolutist free speech platforms like Gab are immediately taken over by the worst elements.
MeWe has some promise, but is very chat centric. Conservatives are going to need to replicate the entire ecosystem: short-form, long-form (blogging), video (for vlogging), crowdfunding, etc.
So they are building their own border wall to stop borderline content.
Leftists, they believe in free speech as long as they are still talking.
...betcha the azzhole likes ketchup on his hotdogs too
“content which doesnt exactly violate policies, which need to be removed, but which can still cause harm.”
Cause harm? Youtube videos can ‘cause harm’? Harm to whom? Methinks rather youtube is run by wannabee leftist overlords.
Waiving the big banner of diversity, except for diversity of thought. Hello, Echo Chamber.
People who can be somehow damaged by watching a YouTube video have mental issues.
People who think they have an obligation to prevent it are worse.
So they are building their own border wall to stop borderline content.
What is so difficult about replacing Youtube???
There should be dozens of alternatives out there by now.
There are. Hardly anyone uses them.
Exactly why I no longer use Google’s search engine. I use DuckDuckGo and I cannot see any difference, other than I get unfiltered content.
They want to recreate the MSM on the web.
They’re trying to re-establish their cartel, cram the genie BACK into the tiny, hateful, America-loathing bottle.
It might get broken up into pieces like all the baby bells were from the ATT court decision in the 1980's.
On any given day, the border is wherever google says it is.
Ooooooh...that's gonna leave a mark. But hey, no need to get that nasty and go to that level. Let's be civilized here. </sarcasm>
Another reason why 20 is vital. We are at the point where the republic lives or dies with every election. The next time the Rats win its over.
They need to get stomped - then stomped again. Then again.. until they're no longer a threat to our nation's discourse.
Gotta love the orwellian speak. They’re not “banning” speech - they’re “protecting” people from “hate speech”.
It’s time for adults to take the web back and institute a new, uncensored, search engine and video service.
I’m done with Google and have already uninstalled YouTube from all my devices.
Dailymotion and Twitch are the two best alternatives. The key would be for conservative content creators to start dual posting their videos to both YouTube and one of those alternative sites.
Of course, without knowing the politics of Dailymotion and Twitch, this may not work. They may censor the same as YouTube.
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.