YouTube is now deleting history because "hate speech"

[MindWars]

YouTube is not the repository of "history". It CANNOT therefore "delete" any. Get a grip.

you are a retard on steroids , the only one who believes a thing you say is you yourself in ur own head.

 

[Pogo]

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.

Indeed, if that hair-on-fire hallucination were true, confirmation bias would be impossible. If "history" actually existed only as far as freaking YouTube (of all creatures) allowed it, then no alternative views would exist from which to pick and choose one's favourite narratively digestible.

This thread takes the inane illogic of the "b-but statues are history" malarkey and feeds it full of methamphetamine.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

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.

oh ive hit a nerve
dont get your depends in a tussle grandma im neither .....BUT IF you say so comrade !
Are you a national socialist or a democratic socialist ?

Youre both pretty much the same
All you Nazi book burners not much difference at all

 

[Pogo]

YouTube is not the repository of "history". It CANNOT therefore "delete" any. Get a grip.

you are a retard on steroids , the only one who believes a thing you say is you yourself in ur own head.

Ironic post from a mental midget who spends all day linking Alex John Brinkley Jones pages that don't even have a
story on them.

 

[MindWars]

YouTube is not the repository of "history". It CANNOT therefore "delete" any. Get a grip.

you are a retard on steroids , the only one who believes a thing you say is you yourself in ur own head.

Ironic post from a mental midget who spends all day linking Alex John Brinkley Jones pages that don't even have a
story on them.

 

[Pogo]

YouTube is not the repository of "history". It CANNOT therefore "delete" any. Get a grip.

you are a retard on steroids , the only one who believes a thing you say is you yourself in ur own head.

Ironic post from a mental midget who spends all day linking Alex John Brinkley Jones pages that don't even have a
story on them.

When all you have is an ad hom fallacy --------- you're pretty much done.

However I appreciate the donation of the earplugs. Thanks but I already have clean ones. I put them in when I see one of your inane threads bubbling up.

 

[Fang]

YouTube's mission statement:

"Our mission is to give everyone a voice and show them the world. We believe that everyone deserves to have a voice, and that the world is a better place when we listen, share and build community through our stories."

Additionally:

Freedom of Information
"We believe everyone should have easy, open access to information and that video is a powerful force for education, building understanding, and documenting world events, big and small."

If the OP is correct and YouTube is deleting historical documents because they deem it "hate speech" then YouTube is in violation of their own mission statement and purpose. Those people arguing "YouTube" is a private business and is not a a historical repository are just as ignorant and prone to repeating the same mistakes as those deleting historical videos.

 

[Marion Morrison]

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.

Thanks. We're already close to a point where those possessed of certain political beliefs cannot find information (historical facts in particular) via online search engine results to back up or promote their points in (mostly) civilized discourse such as on this message board. Case in point, earlier today I was scouring the net for information pertaining to the history of black American soldiers during the second world war, because frankly . . . there's been a whole hell of a lot of historical revisionism on the subject since about 1988. While I found a few "true" sources on the subject, by and large Google and other search engines' results want to ram historical accounts down our throats which have been altered nefariously in support of modern American political correctness and left leaning race narratives.

What's the answer? Well, for starters local community library reference sections are a great place to still find true, factual historical accounts of American History, as are some university libraries, my own included . . . although one needs to beware of newer reference texts and pretty much everything that's been digitalized in the last decade or so. Otherwise, dig deep enough in those search engine results and you might find some nuggets of truth, however, often these anti-politically correct articles and entries will be preceded or followed by links to what Google wants to call "all you need to know about _______". Avoid these like the plague, as well as everything on Wikipedia if it's the truth you're after.

Google was good in around 2007. There's a problem in that they were allowed to buy up servers that make up the backbone of the internet and and competition still has to go through their servers and metatags can be filtered that way. I remember when Yahoo was 10x better than Google and Google sucked real bad, back in the Altavista days.

 

[Marion Morrison]

YouTube is not the repository of "history". It CANNOT therefore "delete" any. Get a grip.

It's the 2nd most visited website on the planet. Read between the lines and stop being a fucking brainlet.

I don't give a flying fuck how "visited" it is. McDonald's sells a skillion cardboard-burgers, doesn't make it "food" because "volume". That's not even an argument.

The point stands. The yahoos who put a "funny" on that point without disputing it are not about to convince anybody that the Mark Dices and the Prager "U"s and the Alex John Brinkley Joneses are any kind of "history".

History lives in BOOKS.

You really are a fucking tool.

The medium of how history is stored/relayed changes over time, idiot. There's a reason we don't cave paint in animal blood and chisel things in stone anymore - we created more efficient ways of storing and disseminating information. Now that we're in a digital age we're doing it again. Denial of this is patently absurd... but I'd expect nothing less from a dumb ass leftist.

And with this post you’ve destroyed the premise of your thread – well done.

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.’

Unless access to that information is denied because it's deemed "hatespeech".

 

[Erinwltr]

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.

Now see, there you went and did it again. I had to look up hummingbird cake. Never heard of such a thing. Thank you.

As for the OP, looks like some well intended youtube historical posters got caught up in the dragnet to take out the hate trash. I'm sure youtube will refine the code to fix that. In the meantime, it gives the Orange Cult followers something to holler at the moon about.

 

[Erinwltr]

YouTube is not the repository of "history". It CANNOT therefore "delete" any. Get a grip.

you are a retard on steroids , the only one who believes a thing you say is you yourself in ur own head.

Every time you mess with Pogo, you get slapped around like a whiny little beotch.

 

[Pogo]

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.

Now see, there you went and did it again. I had to look up hummingbird cake. Never heard of such a thing. Thank you.

As for the OP, looks like some well intended youtube historical posters got caught up in the dragnet to take out the hate trash. I'm sure youtube will refine the code to fix that. In the meantime, it gives the Orange Cult followers something to holler at the moon about.

Hummingbird Cake is what you get when you either (a) die and go to heaven or (b) find it on a menu and shell out five bucks for it. Either way it's worth the price.

 

[Erinwltr]

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.

Now see, there you went and did it again. I had to look up hummingbird cake. Never heard of such a thing. Thank you.

As for the OP, looks like some well intended youtube historical posters got caught up in the dragnet to take out the hate trash. I'm sure youtube will refine the code to fix that. In the meantime, it gives the Orange Cult followers something to holler at the moon about.

Hummingbird Cake is what you get when you either (a) die and go to heaven or (b) find it on a menu and shell out five bucks for it. Either way it's worth the price.

I'll pay the 5 bucks, I don't want to die and go to heaven. LOL! Pineapple and banana cake with a sort of cream cheese frosting. Triple layer even. Sounds like some thing my Grandmother would have baked but didn't. She was a northern gal.

To stay on topic. I refined the OP.

This is what happens when you start dictating who is allowed to Bake and what they are allowed to Bake about.