YouTube is now deleting history because "hate speech"

[Carl in Michigan]

And who defines what hate speech IS?

You seriously dont know?

The Left

 

[Pogo]

Quotes:

"YouTube announced new rules around hate speech on Wednesday that prohibit videos promoting Nazi ideology or denying the existence of the Holocaust or other well-documented violent events like the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Thousands of channels are expected to be shut down. But now multiple teachers are complaining that videos uploaded to educate people about Nazi history have been deleted, the Guardian reported."

"Scott Allsop, who owns the longrunning MrAllsopHistory revision website and teaches at an international school in Romania, had his channel featuring hundreds of historical clips on topics ranging from the Norman conquest to the cold war deleted for breaching the rules that ban hate speech."

"Richard Jones-Nerzic, another British teacher affected by the crackdown, suggested YouTube’s policy did not take into account the extent to which the history syllabus focused on the second world war.

“Modern world study and Hitler in particular have dominated the history curriculum in the UK over the last 25 years,” he said, explaining that he had been censured for uploading clips to his channel from old documentaries about the rise of nazism."

YouTube is deleting videos on Nazi history as part of its hate speech crackdown

YouTube blocks history teachers uploading archive videos of Hitler


This is what happens when you start dictating who is allowed to speak and what they are allowed to speak about - erasure of history and ensuring that the bloody cycle of freedom --> bondage happens AGAIN. Thank your local leftist snowflake.

While I don't believe that utube is erasing history, I do believe they are performing a public disservice.

In the broader context of censorship, I find it odd that people of a certain political leaning are cavalier in their response to the topic. At one time we supported a fairness doctrine.

Of course the irony is that the other political leaning killed it, because, you know, the free market. But that doesn't mean we, on the left, should change our values.

The basis of the Fairness Doctrine was the finite broadcast space. Only so many (and not many) broadcast stations could fit on the airwaves as allocated, meaning only a few could be allocated space to broadcast, therefore those so allocated were required to strike a balance.

Interestingly the "other political leaning" also championed it, when they thought FDR was getting too much airtime with his "Fireside Chats".

But no such limitation exists on the internet. Never has.

 

[Tehon]

Quotes:

"YouTube announced new rules around hate speech on Wednesday that prohibit videos promoting Nazi ideology or denying the existence of the Holocaust or other well-documented violent events like the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Thousands of channels are expected to be shut down. But now multiple teachers are complaining that videos uploaded to educate people about Nazi history have been deleted, the Guardian reported."

"Scott Allsop, who owns the longrunning MrAllsopHistory revision website and teaches at an international school in Romania, had his channel featuring hundreds of historical clips on topics ranging from the Norman conquest to the cold war deleted for breaching the rules that ban hate speech."

"Richard Jones-Nerzic, another British teacher affected by the crackdown, suggested YouTube’s policy did not take into account the extent to which the history syllabus focused on the second world war.

“Modern world study and Hitler in particular have dominated the history curriculum in the UK over the last 25 years,” he said, explaining that he had been censured for uploading clips to his channel from old documentaries about the rise of nazism."

YouTube is deleting videos on Nazi history as part of its hate speech crackdown

YouTube blocks history teachers uploading archive videos of Hitler


This is what happens when you start dictating who is allowed to speak and what they are allowed to speak about - erasure of history and ensuring that the bloody cycle of freedom --> bondage happens AGAIN. Thank your local leftist snowflake.

While I don't believe that utube is erasing history, I do believe they are performing a public disservice.

In the broader context of censorship, I find it odd that people of a certain political leaning are cavalier in their response to the topic. At one time we supported a fairness doctrine.

Of course the irony is that the other political leaning killed it, because, you know, the free market. But that doesn't mean we, on the left, should change our values.

The basis of the Fairness Doctrine was the finite broadcast space. Only so many (and not many) broadcast stations could fit on the airwaves as allocated, meaning only a few could be allocated space to broadcast, therefore those so allocated were required to strike a balance.

Interestingly the "other political leaning" also championed it, when they thought FDR was getting too much airtime with his "Fireside Chats".

But no such limitation exists on the internet. Never has.

I am not advocating for a fairness doctrine for the internet. I do recognize the difference between early radio accessibility and the modern internet. But I don't think the underlying principles of fairness are altered by the distinction and we should be cognizant of them.
A retreat into different internet camps is not a recipe for success. It hasn't worked with TV and radio. Things have only gotten worse since the deregulation of broadcasting and the elimination of the fairness doctrine. It's what the corporations want because it divides us even further and it makes it even easier to control us.

Did The Demise Of The Fairness Doctrine Lead To Trump's Election? | HuffPost


Yeah, at one time, before the corporations organized and began weakening the public's ability to manipulate outcomes, even the Republicans got it.
This is from a speech given by Calvin Coolidge at a radio conference in 1924. It seems that the Democrats have lost sight of this, providing a clear example of the Democrat shift to the right.

"It would be unfortunate indeed, if such an important function as the distribution of information should ever fall into the hands of the government. It would be still more unfortunate if its control should come under the arbitrary power of any person or group of persons. It is inconceivable that such a situation could be allowed to exist."
The Fairness Doctrine and the Media

 

[Pogo]

Quotes:

"YouTube announced new rules around hate speech on Wednesday that prohibit videos promoting Nazi ideology or denying the existence of the Holocaust or other well-documented violent events like the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Thousands of channels are expected to be shut down. But now multiple teachers are complaining that videos uploaded to educate people about Nazi history have been deleted, the Guardian reported."

"Scott Allsop, who owns the longrunning MrAllsopHistory revision website and teaches at an international school in Romania, had his channel featuring hundreds of historical clips on topics ranging from the Norman conquest to the cold war deleted for breaching the rules that ban hate speech."

"Richard Jones-Nerzic, another British teacher affected by the crackdown, suggested YouTube’s policy did not take into account the extent to which the history syllabus focused on the second world war.

“Modern world study and Hitler in particular have dominated the history curriculum in the UK over the last 25 years,” he said, explaining that he had been censured for uploading clips to his channel from old documentaries about the rise of nazism."

YouTube is deleting videos on Nazi history as part of its hate speech crackdown

YouTube blocks history teachers uploading archive videos of Hitler


This is what happens when you start dictating who is allowed to speak and what they are allowed to speak about - erasure of history and ensuring that the bloody cycle of freedom --> bondage happens AGAIN. Thank your local leftist snowflake.

While I don't believe that utube is erasing history, I do believe they are performing a public disservice.

In the broader context of censorship, I find it odd that people of a certain political leaning are cavalier in their response to the topic. At one time we supported a fairness doctrine.

Of course the irony is that the other political leaning killed it, because, you know, the free market. But that doesn't mean we, on the left, should change our values.

The basis of the Fairness Doctrine was the finite broadcast space. Only so many (and not many) broadcast stations could fit on the airwaves as allocated, meaning only a few could be allocated space to broadcast, therefore those so allocated were required to strike a balance.

Interestingly the "other political leaning" also championed it, when they thought FDR was getting too much airtime with his "Fireside Chats".

But no such limitation exists on the internet. Never has.

I am not advocating for a fairness doctrine for the internet. I do recognize the difference between early radio accessibility and the modern internet. But I don't think the underlying principles of fairness are altered by the distinction and we should be cognizant of them.
A retreat into different internet camps is not a recipe for success. It hasn't worked with TV and radio. Things have only gotten worse since the deregulation of broadcasting and the elimination of the fairness doctrine. It's what the corporations want because it divides us even further and it makes it even easier to control us.

Did The Demise Of The Fairness Doctrine Lead To Trump's Election? | HuffPost


Yeah, at one time, before the corporations organized and began weakening the public's ability to manipulate outcomes, even the Republicans got it.
This is from a speech given by Calvin Coolidge at a radio conference in 1924. It seems that the Democrats have lost sight of this, providing a clear example of the Democrat shift to the right.

"It would be unfortunate indeed, if such an important function as the distribution of information should ever fall into the hands of the government. It would be still more unfortunate if its control should come under the arbitrary power of any person or group of persons. It is inconceivable that such a situation could be allowed to exist."
The Fairness Doctrine and the Media

The other factor being left out here is that YouTube is not part of the government; it's a private company. As such the OP's hair-on-fire melodrama is the same as crying "CENSORSHIP" because one's commercial country station has changed to sports talk. So it doesn't amount to government control but rather corporate control. This site we post on does the same thing, which would be evident if we were to veer off into discussions of pedophilia, bestiality, other message boards or each other's parentage. Government plays no role in either this site or that one; it's a corporate policy, and as such cannot meet the ridiculous "YouTube is deleting history" malarkey, as YouTube does not bear that burden in the first place, as my first post here pointed out. And the fact remains that the limitations of finite space that spurred the guidelines of early radio/TV to balance their editorial content, simply do not exist on the internet.

It also does not escape this writer that for all the myriad watchdogs interested in containing government overreach, there are precious few interested in exercising the same restraint on corporate overreach, of which the present thread could be an example if it were accurately characterized instead of bending over backward to pretend its complaint is somehow political rather than social, and thereby picking fights with its fellow users of its target, instead of the target itself.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This is what happens when you start hysterically censoring people.

Collateral damage

And this is also why it should be talked about and highlighted for the bullshit it is. Because they will eventually come for you next.

Like the old saying. Give an inch and they will take a mile.

No, this fails as an old slippery slope fallacy.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Youtube is not obligated to host any content they deem hateful or harmful. The poor alt right snowflakes are free to spew their bullshit somewhere else. Anyone that disagrees with youtube is free to choose a different content provider and boycott youtube.

Why don't you try reading the OP the next time you comment. Then you might not look like such a moron.

Moron.

Its not my fault the snowflake victim op deman

Youtube is not obligated to host any content they deem hateful or harmful. The poor alt right snowflakes are free to spew their bullshit somewhere else. Anyone that disagrees with youtube is free to choose a different content provider and boycott youtube.

Why don't you try reading the OP the next time you comment. Then you might not look like such a moron.

Moron.

Sorry snowflake you don't get to tell youtube what to do. Start your own history website and stop being a whiney bitch.

Quotes:

"YouTube announced new rules around hate speech on Wednesday that prohibit videos promoting Nazi ideology or denying the existence of the Holocaust or other well-documented violent events like the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Thousands of channels are expected to be shut down. But now multiple teachers are complaining that videos uploaded to educate people about Nazi history have been deleted, the Guardian reported."

"Scott Allsop, who owns the longrunning MrAllsopHistory revision website and teaches at an international school in Romania, had his channel featuring hundreds of historical clips on topics ranging from the Norman conquest to the cold war deleted for breaching the rules that ban hate speech."

"Richard Jones-Nerzic, another British teacher affected by the crackdown, suggested YouTube’s policy did not take into account the extent to which the history syllabus focused on the second world war.

“Modern world study and Hitler in particular have dominated the history curriculum in the UK over the last 25 years,” he said, explaining that he had been censured for uploading clips to his channel from old documentaries about the rise of nazism."

YouTube is deleting videos on Nazi history as part of its hate speech crackdown

YouTube blocks history teachers uploading archive videos of Hitler


This is what happens when you start dictating who is allowed to speak and what they are allowed to speak about - erasure of history and ensuring that the bloody cycle of freedom --> bondage happens AGAIN. Thank your local leftist snowflake.

Nonsense.

YouTube isn’t ‘deleting history’ – the notion is a lie and nothing but rightwing demagoguery.

And what YouTube does or doesn’t do with regard to editing content has nothing to do with ‘leftists.’

Are you 2 fucking stupid or just illiterate? The content in question was not material created by your phantom right-wing boogeymen, they were legitimate historical footage used in classroom lessons. Can you dumb shits pull your heads out of your asses for 10 seconds and actually READ something before spouting off?

Jesus H Christ... This is why I swear we need literacy tests for voting.

Again:

We are indeed in a digital age, the age of the internet, the age of virtually infinite data storage and retrieval, where all manner of information can be obtained by anyone with access to the internet – there is no ‘information monopoly.’

The content in question is widely available on countless other websites functioning on a virtually infinite internet.

What YouTube does or doesn’t allow doesn’t change that.

This is still about the right’s unwarranted hostility toward hosting sites, social media platforms, and search engines conservatives incorrectly perceived to be ‘liberal’ and engaging in ‘censorship’ of conservative voices – having nothing to do with a ‘concern’ about history being ‘deleted.’

And your ad hominem fallacy is further confirmation of the fact that your thread premise has failed.

 

[badger2]

One thing that may be current to Sandy Hook is the Russian probe linked to Bruce Ohr and Oleg Deripaska. The history of the Russian aluminum business is the connection to Sandy Hook, in the USMB Politics forum.

 

[badger2]

#86: 'There is no information monopoly.' The net is surprisingly limited in its access to esoterica.

 

[Tehon]

Quotes:

"YouTube announced new rules around hate speech on Wednesday that prohibit videos promoting Nazi ideology or denying the existence of the Holocaust or other well-documented violent events like the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Thousands of channels are expected to be shut down. But now multiple teachers are complaining that videos uploaded to educate people about Nazi history have been deleted, the Guardian reported."

"Scott Allsop, who owns the longrunning MrAllsopHistory revision website and teaches at an international school in Romania, had his channel featuring hundreds of historical clips on topics ranging from the Norman conquest to the cold war deleted for breaching the rules that ban hate speech."

"Richard Jones-Nerzic, another British teacher affected by the crackdown, suggested YouTube’s policy did not take into account the extent to which the history syllabus focused on the second world war.

“Modern world study and Hitler in particular have dominated the history curriculum in the UK over the last 25 years,” he said, explaining that he had been censured for uploading clips to his channel from old documentaries about the rise of nazism."

YouTube is deleting videos on Nazi history as part of its hate speech crackdown

YouTube blocks history teachers uploading archive videos of Hitler


This is what happens when you start dictating who is allowed to speak and what they are allowed to speak about - erasure of history and ensuring that the bloody cycle of freedom --> bondage happens AGAIN. Thank your local leftist snowflake.

While I don't believe that utube is erasing history, I do believe they are performing a public disservice.

In the broader context of censorship, I find it odd that people of a certain political leaning are cavalier in their response to the topic. At one time we supported a fairness doctrine.

Of course the irony is that the other political leaning killed it, because, you know, the free market. But that doesn't mean we, on the left, should change our values.

The basis of the Fairness Doctrine was the finite broadcast space. Only so many (and not many) broadcast stations could fit on the airwaves as allocated, meaning only a few could be allocated space to broadcast, therefore those so allocated were required to strike a balance.

Interestingly the "other political leaning" also championed it, when they thought FDR was getting too much airtime with his "Fireside Chats".

But no such limitation exists on the internet. Never has.

I am not advocating for a fairness doctrine for the internet. I do recognize the difference between early radio accessibility and the modern internet. But I don't think the underlying principles of fairness are altered by the distinction and we should be cognizant of them.
A retreat into different internet camps is not a recipe for success. It hasn't worked with TV and radio. Things have only gotten worse since the deregulation of broadcasting and the elimination of the fairness doctrine. It's what the corporations want because it divides us even further and it makes it even easier to control us.

Did The Demise Of The Fairness Doctrine Lead To Trump's Election? | HuffPost


Yeah, at one time, before the corporations organized and began weakening the public's ability to manipulate outcomes, even the Republicans got it.
This is from a speech given by Calvin Coolidge at a radio conference in 1924. It seems that the Democrats have lost sight of this, providing a clear example of the Democrat shift to the right.

"It would be unfortunate indeed, if such an important function as the distribution of information should ever fall into the hands of the government. It would be still more unfortunate if its control should come under the arbitrary power of any person or group of persons. It is inconceivable that such a situation could be allowed to exist."
The Fairness Doctrine and the Media

The other factor being left out here is that YouTube is not part of the government; it's a private company. As such the OP's hair-on-fire melodrama is the same as crying "CENSORSHIP" because one's commercial country station has changed to sports talk. So it doesn't amount to government control but rather corporate control. This site we post on does the same thing, which would be evident if we were to veer off into discussions of pedophilia, bestiality, other message boards or each other's parentage. Government plays no role in either this site or that one; it's a corporate policy, and as such cannot meet the ridiculous "YouTube is deleting history" malarkey, as YouTube does not bear that burden in the first place, as my first post here pointed out. And the fact remains that the limitations of finite space that spurred the guidelines of early radio/TV to balance their editorial content, simply do not exist on the internet.

It also does not escape this writer that for all the myriad watchdogs interested in containing government overreach, there are precious few interested in exercising the same restraint on corporate overreach, of which the present thread could be an example if it were accurately characterized instead of bending over backward to pretend its complaint is somehow political rather than social, and thereby picking fights with its fellow users of its target, instead of the target itself.

I want to know who is watching out for the convergence of state and corporate power. Those are the people that I like to follow. The fear being that these people that I follow will be caught up and marginalized with the consent of a compliant populace who are all too eager to be protected from speech they do not like. The warning signs are there. I think we need to tread carefully in how we treat a company with the social power that a google has.

I see the hyperventilating from the right, but I also see the knee jerk reaction from the left.

I don't care if youtube is a private company, they have a social responsibility and it is the legitimate role of government to ensure that it is met. They need to bake me a cake.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Yep. Right now it is where the eyeballs go. TEACHERS are not happy about this. These videos being banned are not glorifying Nazism.
If we forget history, we WILL repeat the mistakes of the past

Correction.....
Since we forgot history, we are repeating the mistakes of the past

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

Sorry snowflake you don't get to tell youtube what to do. Start your own history website and stop being a whiney bitch.

Snowflake.......
You must not realize "Snowflake" refers to someone with LEFTIST ideology. Some people prove their ignorance with every post.

 

[OldLady]

Youtube is not obligated to host any content they deem hateful or harmful. The poor alt right snowflakes are free to spew their bullshit somewhere else. Anyone that disagrees with youtube is free to choose a different content provider and boycott youtube.

Why don't you try reading the OP the next time you comment. Then you might not look like such a moron.

Moron.

Its not my fault the snowflake victim op deman

Youtube is not obligated to host any content they deem hateful or harmful. The poor alt right snowflakes are free to spew their bullshit somewhere else. Anyone that disagrees with youtube is free to choose a different content provider and boycott youtube.

Why don't you try reading the OP the next time you comment. Then you might not look like such a moron.

Moron.

Sorry snowflake you don't get to tell youtube what to do. Start your own history website and stop being a whiney bitch.

Quotes:

"YouTube announced new rules around hate speech on Wednesday that prohibit videos promoting Nazi ideology or denying the existence of the Holocaust or other well-documented violent events like the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Thousands of channels are expected to be shut down. But now multiple teachers are complaining that videos uploaded to educate people about Nazi history have been deleted, the Guardian reported."

"Scott Allsop, who owns the longrunning MrAllsopHistory revision website and teaches at an international school in Romania, had his channel featuring hundreds of historical clips on topics ranging from the Norman conquest to the cold war deleted for breaching the rules that ban hate speech."

"Richard Jones-Nerzic, another British teacher affected by the crackdown, suggested YouTube’s policy did not take into account the extent to which the history syllabus focused on the second world war.

“Modern world study and Hitler in particular have dominated the history curriculum in the UK over the last 25 years,” he said, explaining that he had been censured for uploading clips to his channel from old documentaries about the rise of nazism."

YouTube is deleting videos on Nazi history as part of its hate speech crackdown

YouTube blocks history teachers uploading archive videos of Hitler


This is what happens when you start dictating who is allowed to speak and what they are allowed to speak about - erasure of history and ensuring that the bloody cycle of freedom --> bondage happens AGAIN. Thank your local leftist snowflake.

Nonsense.

YouTube isn’t ‘deleting history’ – the notion is a lie and nothing but rightwing demagoguery.

And what YouTube does or doesn’t do with regard to editing content has nothing to do with ‘leftists.’

Are you 2 fucking stupid or just illiterate? The content in question was not material created by your phantom right-wing boogeymen, they were legitimate historical footage used in classroom lessons. Can you dumb shits pull your heads out of your asses for 10 seconds and actually READ something before spouting off?

Jesus H Christ... This is why I swear we need literacy tests for voting.

Historical footage presented HOW? I saw a movie of "historical footage" once in a philosophy class and couldn't even eat the next day.

It's all in the message, and how it is presented. But no, I am not going to this guy's self-titled revisionist history lessons. Revisionist how? Defending the Nazi's message?
.

 

[OldLady]

Quotes:

"YouTube announced new rules around hate speech on Wednesday that prohibit videos promoting Nazi ideology or denying the existence of the Holocaust or other well-documented violent events like the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Thousands of channels are expected to be shut down. But now multiple teachers are complaining that videos uploaded to educate people about Nazi history have been deleted, the Guardian reported."

"Scott Allsop, who owns the longrunning MrAllsopHistory revision website and teaches at an international school in Romania, had his channel featuring hundreds of historical clips on topics ranging from the Norman conquest to the cold war deleted for breaching the rules that ban hate speech."

"Richard Jones-Nerzic, another British teacher affected by the crackdown, suggested YouTube’s policy did not take into account the extent to which the history syllabus focused on the second world war.

“Modern world study and Hitler in particular have dominated the history curriculum in the UK over the last 25 years,” he said, explaining that he had been censured for uploading clips to his channel from old documentaries about the rise of nazism."

YouTube is deleting videos on Nazi history as part of its hate speech crackdown

YouTube blocks history teachers uploading archive videos of Hitler


This is what happens when you start dictating who is allowed to speak and what they are allowed to speak about - erasure of history and ensuring that the bloody cycle of freedom --> bondage happens AGAIN. Thank your local leftist snowflake.

Penny and her Merry Band of Holocaust Deniers are going to get their feelings hurt when they find out their Leftist Overlords think Holocaust Denial is "hate speech"

The guy i posted wasn't some revisionist history teacher or a raging jew hater.
he was just a regular joe. I'm just sayin teach

i can get "rude "the rest not aimed at you

LOOKs like they got the SPLC to
NOW thats a lil embarrassing ...for some .....cough

Liberal activists are crying foul after YouTube’s demonetizing frenzy slammed the Southern Poverty Law Center, an organization known for labeling conservative groups as hate groups.

A video SPLC published was among those nixed after YouTube announced plans Wednesday to remove videos and content that promote white supremacy. Journalist Max Blumenthal lashed out at the company after the video, which reports on Holocaust denialism, was pulled for violating the new policy.

The best way to deal with any hate group ? Well ya leave them out in the sunshine
MORONS

Thats only going to grow...sit back and watch . Especially with the anti white bullshit thats being fed to the useful idiot masses...keep eating and it feeding it .All ya do is drive them underground where they can get dangerous .
I wont even go to how people...... for example on the other side of that authoritarian nazi coin , In the soviet union pretty much half of the pop went under ground trading "forbidden ideas ", vinyl , books ,western culture blah blah blah

Congrats morons

What a path you've brought this country down batshit crazy leftwing morons.

But Im wrong there
ITs all of western civilization thats convulsing .

You're stopping vile thoughts and ideas ....sure ya's are
thats what its about .......sure it is
yeah
uhm hum

silly us

cry bully authoritarian nazi rat bastids
With their stupid fantasy land Utopian pipes dreams

Say whatever you like, justify it whatever way you can think of, hate speech does not have to be tolerated by ANY ONE in this country. It is how fascists everywhere gain power. We know fascists. They are you.

 

[OldLady]

Quotes:

"YouTube announced new rules around hate speech on Wednesday that prohibit videos promoting Nazi ideology or denying the existence of the Holocaust or other well-documented violent events like the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Thousands of channels are expected to be shut down. But now multiple teachers are complaining that videos uploaded to educate people about Nazi history have been deleted, the Guardian reported."

"Scott Allsop, who owns the longrunning MrAllsopHistory revision website and teaches at an international school in Romania, had his channel featuring hundreds of historical clips on topics ranging from the Norman conquest to the cold war deleted for breaching the rules that ban hate speech."

"Richard Jones-Nerzic, another British teacher affected by the crackdown, suggested YouTube’s policy did not take into account the extent to which the history syllabus focused on the second world war.

“Modern world study and Hitler in particular have dominated the history curriculum in the UK over the last 25 years,” he said, explaining that he had been censured for uploading clips to his channel from old documentaries about the rise of nazism."

YouTube is deleting videos on Nazi history as part of its hate speech crackdown

YouTube blocks history teachers uploading archive videos of Hitler


This is what happens when you start dictating who is allowed to speak and what they are allowed to speak about - erasure of history and ensuring that the bloody cycle of freedom --> bondage happens AGAIN. Thank your local leftist snowflake.

While I don't believe that utube is erasing history, I do believe they are performing a public disservice.

In the broader context of censorship, I find it odd that people of a certain political leaning are cavalier in their response to the topic. At one time we supported a fairness doctrine.

Of course the irony is that the other political leaning killed it, because, you know, the free market. But that doesn't mean we, on the left, should change our values.

The basis of the Fairness Doctrine was the finite broadcast space. Only so many (and not many) broadcast stations could fit on the airwaves as allocated, meaning only a few could be allocated space to broadcast, therefore those so allocated were required to strike a balance.

Interestingly the "other political leaning" also championed it, when they thought FDR was getting too much airtime with his "Fireside Chats".

But no such limitation exists on the internet. Never has.

I am not advocating for a fairness doctrine for the internet. I do recognize the difference between early radio accessibility and the modern internet. But I don't think the underlying principles of fairness are altered by the distinction and we should be cognizant of them.
A retreat into different internet camps is not a recipe for success. It hasn't worked with TV and radio. Things have only gotten worse since the deregulation of broadcasting and the elimination of the fairness doctrine. It's what the corporations want because it divides us even further and it makes it even easier to control us.

Did The Demise Of The Fairness Doctrine Lead To Trump's Election? | HuffPost


Yeah, at one time, before the corporations organized and began weakening the public's ability to manipulate outcomes, even the Republicans got it.
This is from a speech given by Calvin Coolidge at a radio conference in 1924. It seems that the Democrats have lost sight of this, providing a clear example of the Democrat shift to the right.

"It would be unfortunate indeed, if such an important function as the distribution of information should ever fall into the hands of the government. It would be still more unfortunate if its control should come under the arbitrary power of any person or group of persons. It is inconceivable that such a situation could be allowed to exist."
The Fairness Doctrine and the Media

Relax. Everyone crying about the stifling of the conservative voice is completely ignoring that a huge conservative voice is spreading across the country. Sinclair.
Sinclair reaches 40 percent of households — and soon will reach 72 percent.

Sinclair Broadcast Group, the pro-Trump, conservative company taking over local news, explained

 

[MindWars]

YouTube is deleting videos on Nazi history as part of its hate speech crackdown



You stupid ass puke left think you are going to re write history you pathetic loser assholes tried this once before you retarded fks!!!!

RE writing history dumb asses doesn't change the fact it happened stupid fks it does change the fact that some where out there someone has it all in detail ready to be published all over again pricks!!

BOOK OF ELI stupid fks watch it there's your taking away of our BOOKS , our History........... sound familiar of course to NON MORONS!!

 

[Moonglow]

You ,missed it honey there were several threads yesterday...

 

[Moonglow]

YouTube is deleting videos on Nazi history as part of its hate speech crackdown



You stupid ass puke left think you are going to re write history you pathetic loser assholes tried this once before you retarded fks!!!!

RE writing history dumb asses doesn't change the fact it happened stupid fks it does change the fact that some where out there someone has it all in detail ready to be published all over again pricks!!

BOOK OF ELI stupid fks watch it there's your taking away of our BOOKS , our History........... sound familiar of course to NON MORONS!!

 

[Pogo]

Quotes:

"YouTube announced new rules around hate speech on Wednesday that prohibit videos promoting Nazi ideology or denying the existence of the Holocaust or other well-documented violent events like the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Thousands of channels are expected to be shut down. But now multiple teachers are complaining that videos uploaded to educate people about Nazi history have been deleted, the Guardian reported."

"Scott Allsop, who owns the longrunning MrAllsopHistory revision website and teaches at an international school in Romania, had his channel featuring hundreds of historical clips on topics ranging from the Norman conquest to the cold war deleted for breaching the rules that ban hate speech."

"Richard Jones-Nerzic, another British teacher affected by the crackdown, suggested YouTube’s policy did not take into account the extent to which the history syllabus focused on the second world war.

“Modern world study and Hitler in particular have dominated the history curriculum in the UK over the last 25 years,” he said, explaining that he had been censured for uploading clips to his channel from old documentaries about the rise of nazism."

YouTube is deleting videos on Nazi history as part of its hate speech crackdown

YouTube blocks history teachers uploading archive videos of Hitler


This is what happens when you start dictating who is allowed to speak and what they are allowed to speak about - erasure of history and ensuring that the bloody cycle of freedom --> bondage happens AGAIN. Thank your local leftist snowflake.

While I don't believe that utube is erasing history, I do believe they are performing a public disservice.

In the broader context of censorship, I find it odd that people of a certain political leaning are cavalier in their response to the topic. At one time we supported a fairness doctrine.

Of course the irony is that the other political leaning killed it, because, you know, the free market. But that doesn't mean we, on the left, should change our values.

The basis of the Fairness Doctrine was the finite broadcast space. Only so many (and not many) broadcast stations could fit on the airwaves as allocated, meaning only a few could be allocated space to broadcast, therefore those so allocated were required to strike a balance.

Interestingly the "other political leaning" also championed it, when they thought FDR was getting too much airtime with his "Fireside Chats".

But no such limitation exists on the internet. Never has.

I am not advocating for a fairness doctrine for the internet. I do recognize the difference between early radio accessibility and the modern internet. But I don't think the underlying principles of fairness are altered by the distinction and we should be cognizant of them.
A retreat into different internet camps is not a recipe for success. It hasn't worked with TV and radio. Things have only gotten worse since the deregulation of broadcasting and the elimination of the fairness doctrine. It's what the corporations want because it divides us even further and it makes it even easier to control us.

Did The Demise Of The Fairness Doctrine Lead To Trump's Election? | HuffPost


Yeah, at one time, before the corporations organized and began weakening the public's ability to manipulate outcomes, even the Republicans got it.
This is from a speech given by Calvin Coolidge at a radio conference in 1924. It seems that the Democrats have lost sight of this, providing a clear example of the Democrat shift to the right.

"It would be unfortunate indeed, if such an important function as the distribution of information should ever fall into the hands of the government. It would be still more unfortunate if its control should come under the arbitrary power of any person or group of persons. It is inconceivable that such a situation could be allowed to exist."
The Fairness Doctrine and the Media

Relax. Everyone crying about the stifling of the conservative voice is completely ignoring that a huge conservative voice is spreading across the country. Sinclair.
Sinclair reaches 40 percent of households — and soon will reach 72 percent.

Sinclair Broadcast Group, the pro-Trump, conservative company taking over local news, explained

Nothing short of complete-control monopoly will ever satisfy the One-Party set. And even when they get it they'll bicker over which ultrafascist script gets to play on that stage, dismissing the disdained as "RINOs" or "globalists" or whatever cockamamie term they come up with next week.

They've already got complete corporate domination of media and hysterically, try to call that milieu "liburrul".

Such is the way of the Cult, where independent out-of-lockstep critical thought is looked down on as some kind of bubonic plague.

 

[Pogo]

Quotes:

"YouTube announced new rules around hate speech on Wednesday that prohibit videos promoting Nazi ideology or denying the existence of the Holocaust or other well-documented violent events like the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School. Thousands of channels are expected to be shut down. But now multiple teachers are complaining that videos uploaded to educate people about Nazi history have been deleted, the Guardian reported."

"Scott Allsop, who owns the longrunning MrAllsopHistory revision website and teaches at an international school in Romania, had his channel featuring hundreds of historical clips on topics ranging from the Norman conquest to the cold war deleted for breaching the rules that ban hate speech."

"Richard Jones-Nerzic, another British teacher affected by the crackdown, suggested YouTube’s policy did not take into account the extent to which the history syllabus focused on the second world war.

“Modern world study and Hitler in particular have dominated the history curriculum in the UK over the last 25 years,” he said, explaining that he had been censured for uploading clips to his channel from old documentaries about the rise of nazism."

YouTube is deleting videos on Nazi history as part of its hate speech crackdown

YouTube blocks history teachers uploading archive videos of Hitler


This is what happens when you start dictating who is allowed to speak and what they are allowed to speak about - erasure of history and ensuring that the bloody cycle of freedom --> bondage happens AGAIN. Thank your local leftist snowflake.

While I don't believe that utube is erasing history, I do believe they are performing a public disservice.

In the broader context of censorship, I find it odd that people of a certain political leaning are cavalier in their response to the topic. At one time we supported a fairness doctrine.

Of course the irony is that the other political leaning killed it, because, you know, the free market. But that doesn't mean we, on the left, should change our values.

The basis of the Fairness Doctrine was the finite broadcast space. Only so many (and not many) broadcast stations could fit on the airwaves as allocated, meaning only a few could be allocated space to broadcast, therefore those so allocated were required to strike a balance.

Interestingly the "other political leaning" also championed it, when they thought FDR was getting too much airtime with his "Fireside Chats".

But no such limitation exists on the internet. Never has.

I am not advocating for a fairness doctrine for the internet. I do recognize the difference between early radio accessibility and the modern internet. But I don't think the underlying principles of fairness are altered by the distinction and we should be cognizant of them.
A retreat into different internet camps is not a recipe for success. It hasn't worked with TV and radio. Things have only gotten worse since the deregulation of broadcasting and the elimination of the fairness doctrine. It's what the corporations want because it divides us even further and it makes it even easier to control us.

Did The Demise Of The Fairness Doctrine Lead To Trump's Election? | HuffPost


Yeah, at one time, before the corporations organized and began weakening the public's ability to manipulate outcomes, even the Republicans got it.
This is from a speech given by Calvin Coolidge at a radio conference in 1924. It seems that the Democrats have lost sight of this, providing a clear example of the Democrat shift to the right.

"It would be unfortunate indeed, if such an important function as the distribution of information should ever fall into the hands of the government. It would be still more unfortunate if its control should come under the arbitrary power of any person or group of persons. It is inconceivable that such a situation could be allowed to exist."
The Fairness Doctrine and the Media

The other factor being left out here is that YouTube is not part of the government; it's a private company. As such the OP's hair-on-fire melodrama is the same as crying "CENSORSHIP" because one's commercial country station has changed to sports talk. So it doesn't amount to government control but rather corporate control. This site we post on does the same thing, which would be evident if we were to veer off into discussions of pedophilia, bestiality, other message boards or each other's parentage. Government plays no role in either this site or that one; it's a corporate policy, and as such cannot meet the ridiculous "YouTube is deleting history" malarkey, as YouTube does not bear that burden in the first place, as my first post here pointed out. And the fact remains that the limitations of finite space that spurred the guidelines of early radio/TV to balance their editorial content, simply do not exist on the internet.

It also does not escape this writer that for all the myriad watchdogs interested in containing government overreach, there are precious few interested in exercising the same restraint on corporate overreach, of which the present thread could be an example if it were accurately characterized instead of bending over backward to pretend its complaint is somehow political rather than social, and thereby picking fights with its fellow users of its target, instead of the target itself.

I want to know who is watching out for the convergence of state and corporate power. Those are the people that I like to follow. The fear being that these people that I follow will be caught up and marginalized with the consent of a compliant populace who are all too eager to be protected from speech they do not like. The warning signs are there. I think we need to tread carefully in how we treat a company with the social power that a google has.

I see the hyperventilating from the right, but I also see the knee jerk reaction from the left.

I don't care if youtube is a private company, they have a social responsibility and it is the legitimate role of government to ensure that it is met. They need to bake me a cake.

Well, I won't argue with that. Make mine a hummingbird cake.

 

[MindWars]

Guess since you posted it it's not a conspiracy lol