YouTube Censorship is getting out of control..... - Page 9 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#14896811
Pants-of-dog wrote:Please show which international trade agreements, conventions, treaties, etc. hold foreign companies to US law.


It's not really necessary. The fact is that French courts, UK courts, EU courts have all brought various suits against American services providers by their law in their home forums. Your're not arguing with me, you're arguing with reality.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... sonal-data

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/ ... rust-fine/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LICRA_v._Yahoo!

Territoriality and the First Amendment - William & Mary Law School
#14896831
Sivad wrote:It's not really necessary. The fact is that French courts, UK courts, EU courts have all brought various suits against American services providers by their law in their home forums. Your're not arguing with me, you're arguing with reality.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/201 ... sonal-data

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/ ... rust-fine/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LICRA_v._Yahoo!

Territoriality and the First Amendment - William & Mary Law School


So we agree that Youtube is not a public utility and is currently not regulated as such. And we agree that the first amendment does not apply.

Now, as for the discussion about foreign companies being beholden to US law, if any of these links support your claim, please quote the applicable text. Thank you.
#14903014
Some people are more upset about YouTube censorship than others. Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online Nasim Aghdam, who lives in Southern California, like many others has had her posts flagged for inappropriate content that she alleges wasn't inappropriate (exercise videos in this case). Many people have been complaining about YouTube as they try to use censorship to get people to watch certain types of videos while avoiding others.

I wonder if YouTube will revert its latest fucked up policies in trying to demonetize the content creator community, or will they use it to double down and push their "Red" and other premium content and kill off the broader community.

I don't know how you folks feel. I have a hard time feeling sorry for YouTube.
#14903018
blackjack21 wrote:Some people are more upset about YouTube censorship than others. Suspect in YouTube Shooting Posted Rants About the Company Online Nasim Aghdam, who lives in Southern California, like many others has had her posts flagged for inappropriate content that she alleges wasn't inappropriate (exercise videos in this case). Many people have been complaining about YouTube as they try to use censorship to get people to watch certain types of videos while avoiding others.

I wonder if YouTube will revert its latest fucked up policies in trying to demonetize the content creator community, or will they use it to double down and push their "Red" and other premium content and kill off the broader community.

I don't know how you folks feel. I have a hard time feeling sorry for YouTube.


The link says she shot (and wounded) three people at YouTube Campus and then killed herself.

As such, she does not 'allege' her content was not inappropriate, she 'alleged' this.
#14903023
Yeah...

http://abc7news.com/sources-youtube-sho ... m/3298575/

The Adpocalypse claimed it's first physical victims....

Motivated by not being able to get another job and pay her own Bills at the moment no doubt.

Cut off people's work and income when they rely on your platform... This is what you get.

Probably be more Google shootings and revenge lawsuits one day.
#14903026
The dilemma with Facebook, YouTube etc. is that having everyone on the same platform was ostensibly the point. This turns the concept of the monopoly on its head.

If you get everyone onto the same platform and then you want to censor and control it, they might be biting off more than they can chew.
#14903035
Crantag wrote:As such, she does not 'allege' her content was not inappropriate, she 'alleged' this.

The bulk of her claims can be found on her site: Nasime Sabz

Nasime Sabz wrote:BE AWARE! Dictatorship exists in all countries but with different tactics! They only care for
personal short term profits & do anything to reach their goals even by fooling simple-minded people,
hiding the truth, manipulating science & everything, putting public mental & physical health at risk,
abusing non-human animals, polluting environment, destroying family values, promoting materialism &
sexual degeneration in the name of freedom,..... & turning people into programmed robots!
"Make the lie big, Make it simple, Keep saying it, And eventually they will believe it" Adolf
Hitler... There is no free speech in real world & you will be suppressed for telling the truth that is not
supported by the system. Videos of targeted users are filtered & merely relegated, so that people can
hardly see their videos!
.There is no equal growth opportunity on YOUTUBE or any other video sharing site,
your channel will grow if they want to!!!


She is citing people like Casey Neistat, whom I cited as well almost exactly one month ago here: viewtopic.php?p=14893877#p14893877

Nasime Sabz made a similar complaint:

Nasime Sabz wrote:My Revenue For 300,000 Views Is $0.10???

That is what is happening to people who Google decided to target for demonetization. They were making a living on YouTube, and then YouTube basically cut off their living with almost no notice.

I'm Being Censored | YouTube's War Against Vegans
Sabz quotes Hitler, and Hitler was a vegan. I always enjoy pointing that out. However, I don't see why YouTube decided to demonetize these people and arbitrarily determine that their positions or videos were not "advertiser friendly."

skinster wrote:Loving how YouTube has started to do that new thing where it warns people on videos they have of RT or Telesur reports, where they say something along the lines of "this video is funded by the Russian/Latin governments". I think they're trying to scare people from alternative media. :D

They never seem to do that with PBS, NPR, or the BBC. They are government propaganda too.

layman wrote:People who want to stop YouTube censoring are closet socialists. They see something big and want to nationalise and control it.

Sabz fits the description. She chose to protest violently.
#14903040
blackjack21 wrote:The bulk of her claims can be found on her site: Nasime Sabz



She is citing people like Casey Neistat, whom I cited as well almost exactly one month ago here: viewtopic.php?p=14893877#p14893877

Nasime Sabz made a similar complaint:


That is what is happening to people who Google decided to target for demonetization. They were making a living on YouTube, and then YouTube basically cut off their living with almost no notice.

I'm Being Censored | YouTube's War Against Vegans
Sabz quotes Hitler, and Hitler was a vegan. I always enjoy pointing that out. However, I don't see why YouTube decided to demonetize these people and arbitrarily determine that their positions or videos were not "advertiser friendly."


They never seem to do that with PBS, NPR, or the BBC. They are government propaganda too.


Sabz fits the description. She chose to protest violently.

So she left a trail of rantings before committing the act of lunacy.

Now she gets the publicity she was after, with the likes of you and others reading about it, but she is too dead to appreciate it.

She is a killer, who was fortunately unable to complete the actual killing of anyone except her self (though she did seriously wound three, and it is not unlikely one, two, or all three of them will suffer permanently). Quite a case of providence.

She doesn't deserve any more consideration than that.
#14903115
blackjack21 wrote:The bulk of her claims can be found on her site: Nasime Sabz



She is citing people like Casey Neistat, whom I cited as well almost exactly one month ago here: viewtopic.php?p=14893877#p14893877

Nasime Sabz made a similar complaint:


That is what is happening to people who Google decided to target for demonetization. They were making a living on YouTube, and then YouTube basically cut off their living with almost no notice.

I'm Being Censored | YouTube's War Against Vegans
Sabz quotes Hitler, and Hitler was a vegan. I always enjoy pointing that out. However, I don't see why YouTube decided to demonetize these people and arbitrarily determine that their positions or videos were not "advertiser friendly."


They never seem to do that with PBS, NPR, or the BBC. They are government propaganda too.


Sabz fits the description. She chose to protest violently.

They don't just censor people on the right, they also censor leftists whom they believe are embarrassing their causes, or that is how it appears to me.
#14903131
The op title is an oxymoron to begin with. Censorship can not be out of control. It is control. Those who believe we should censor and control it are just delusional.
#14903139
Godstud wrote:Youtube is a private company. They can censor what they want. Accept it and quit whining.

Laws are made to be changed. Our constitution is highly applauded not because of what it says, but because of the care given to making sure it could evolve. Your argument is based upon a stagnant reality. These types of actions are what result in us deciding to make those changes. We usually give private business warnings to change on their own before we force them to change.
#14903245
Law? What law is there about a private company deciding what is on their servers? Why make a law about what they have to show? Are we basing this one the feelings of a few people who don't like that their videos were censored? Is that it? :roll:

My argument is based on logic of dictating policy to private companies simply because some people get offended because they can't see the videos they want on their service. There are other services you can use. Youtube is not alone.

Why would anyone who values small government want the government to get involved and dictate what someone can or can't show on their private server? Why do we need to force change? This is a dumb idea not supported by any majority.
#14903249
Godstud wrote:Law? What law is there about a private company deciding what is on their servers? Why make a law about what they have to show? Are we basing this one the feelings of a few people who don't like that their videos were censored? Is that it? :roll:

My argument is based on logic of dictating policy to private companies simply because some people get offended because they can't see the videos they want on their service. There are other services you can use. Youtube is not alone.

Why would anyone who values small government want the government to get involved and dictate what someone can or can't show on their private server? Why do we need to force change? This is a dumb idea not supported by any majority.

You are confusing ‘what I want’ with my simple attempt to apply clarity to reality. Your argument is based upon reality being stagnant. I pointed out it is not, and people are free to change the laws you are using to defend your position. If these companies abuse their right, it can be taken away. The threat by itself would make any rational company reconsider their behavior. The people still have the ultimate power, not current laws.
#14903262
The judge dismissed the PragerU case citing Lloyd Corp. v. Tanner, but the interesting thing is both the district court and the appellate court ruled that the private property was a public forum. It was overturned by an extremely conservative Supreme Court with the arch reactionary Lewis Powell writing the majority opinion.
#14903286
Sivad wrote:You are confusing ‘what I want’ with my simple attempt to apply clarity to reality.
I was not talking to you. Your argument is bullshit. Talk to someone else who will buy your foolishness. I will not.
  • 1
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11

It is implausible that the IDF could not or would[…]

Moving on to the next misuse of language that sho[…]

@JohnRawls What if your assumption is wrong??? […]

There is no reason to have a state at all unless w[…]