Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YouTube Bans Alex Jones, Following Facebook's and Apple's Lead

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 191 posts

Re: YouTube Bans Alex Jones, Following Facebook's and Apple's Lead

#151

Post by acct1771 »

tchaffee wrote: post #130
acct1771 wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you're right, inhibit freedom of expression. There's no way that can go wrong after a while.

Forcing YouTube, Facebook, or the side of your house to host Alex Jones' content is inhibiting freedom of speech. People and companies have a right to not say things. If they don't, then please let me know when Alex Jones will be setting aside some of his website and paying for the hosting for my views. I have a lot to say. It would be great to piggy back on his 10 million visitors a month and get a free audience.

When you become large enough that you are effectively replacing the town square, you have an extraordinary responsibility to let everyone have their soap box, because otherwise, you are dictating public opinion.

For better or for worse, the ideas that grasp the most people have prevailed historically.

Letting one small group of people, regardless of how they're chosen, or how self-righteous they feel, decide what's okay and not okay to say, will never end well.

Re: YouTube Bans Alex Jones, Following Facebook's and Apple's Lead

#152

Post by chias »

tlrobinson wrote: post #121
chias wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free speech does not guarantee a platform for your speech, nor does it guarantee that you are able to say the things you want to. Even setting aside "private vs government", it doesn't even guarantee that the government won't censor you. It guarantees that you will not be arrested (by the government providing you with this right) for things that you do say. Even this has a few exceptions, e.g. incitements to violence…

Did you miss the part where I said "I'm not saying private entities should be subject to the 1st Amendment"? My point was "free speech" is not synonymous with "The 1st Amendment". The former is a general concept and the latter is one way we protect it in the United States.

I didn't. I was merely pointing out that "free speech" (as we know it) has nothing to do with what you are able to say, while you seem to be operating off of a different definition.

Re: YouTube Bans Alex Jones, Following Facebook's and Apple's Lead

#153

Post by malvosenior »

torpfactory wrote: post #62
j-c-hewitt wrote: post #40

I think the reason why Alex Jones became popular is because the mainstream news websites like CNN and even sections of the NYT became more Jones-like in their reporting. When people are just choosing between different sensationalist conspiracy theory websites it becomes much more challenging for ordinary people to pick a quality outlet. The thing is that most of the web and the printed word is spam that will actively…

Oh please. What a load of hogwash. NYT and CNN aren’t perfect but making some kind of comparison to the rantings of a lunatic like Jones is absurd. Get a grip.

The NYT just hired a full blown racist to their editorial board so I think it's a very apt comparison.

Re: YouTube Bans Alex Jones, Following Facebook's and Apple's Lead

#154

Post by malvosenior »

lovehashbrowns wrote: post #95
j-c-hewitt wrote: post #40

I think the reason why Alex Jones became popular is because the mainstream news websites like CNN and even sections of the NYT became more Jones-like in their reporting. When people are just choosing between different sensationalist conspiracy theory websites it becomes much more challenging for ordinary people to pick a quality outlet. The thing is that most of the web and the printed word is spam that will actively…

> because the mainstream news websites like CNN and even sections of the NYT became more Jones-like in their reporting What an amazing claim! Surely you have examples of this? I'd love to read conspiracy theories coming from CNN or NYT that are in line with something as absurd as "Michelle Obama is actually a man" or "Sandy Hook was fake" or the absolutely insane birther movement.

NYT: "You can't be racist against white people".

There you go.

Re: YouTube Bans Alex Jones, Following Facebook's and Apple's Lead

#155

Post by mirimir »

vixen99 wrote: post #145
mirimir wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So if Alex Jones makes your blood boil, then put that emotion to work. Raise his platform. Discuss him. Debunk his ideas one by one. Except that doesn't work with trolls. Many of his followers are just in it for the lulz. Engagement just provides more fodder for trolling. You gotta just ignore trolls. And if you can, deny them a platform.

So presumably, had you sufficient power (in government), this is what you would do. Kind of you to check something out so that I don't have to? Is that the logic?

I didn't say government. Private media have the freedom to choose their policies. And anyone has the right to self publish, if no private media will have them.

Furthermore, I also disagree with existing censorship of "illegal" stuff by governments. Not just social/political dissent in China, or ankle porn in Saudi Arabia. Also censorship by the United States, such as gambling, piracy, mail-order drugs, and so on.

However, there is arguably a place for government censorship of criminal activity that demonstrably causes harm. For example, child abuse (but not merely sharing of "child porn") or revenge porn, and so on. But not stuff that's racist, sexist, etc but doesn't directly advocate violence.

Re: YouTube Bans Alex Jones, Following Facebook's and Apple's Lead

#157

Post by thomk »

iovrthoughtthis wrote: post #87
Tomminn wrote: post #12

From Wikipedia: "The InfoWars website receives approximately 10 million monthly visits, making it more visited than some mainstream news websites such as The Economist and Newsweek." This bothers me. Say what you like about his content, but it is not fringe. He is the preferred "thinker" of a significant fraction of the population. If you think the solution is to deplatform him, you're thinking about the problem wron…

Theres lots to unpack here. > He is an opportunity. By becoming a lightening rod and focal point for a large fraction of a country's misguided thinking, he has made that misguided thinking more fragile. Easier to dislodge. Because now you just need to find a combination of words that helps his followers see him for what he actually is. His followers see themselves in him. Attack him and they will feel attacked. Attac…

"The only way to change peoples minds is to realize that you can’t. You can only make it safe for them to change their own minds."

I'm curious where you heard that, it's an interesting perspective I have not considered before.

Re: YouTube Bans Alex Jones, Following Facebook's and Apple's Lead

#158

Post by erik_seaberg »

jimejim wrote: post #23
Tomminn wrote: post #12

From Wikipedia: "The InfoWars website receives approximately 10 million monthly visits, making it more visited than some mainstream news websites such as The Economist and Newsweek." This bothers me. Say what you like about his content, but it is not fringe. He is the preferred "thinker" of a significant fraction of the population. If you think the solution is to deplatform him, you're thinking about the problem wron…

You have more faith in human rationality than I do at this point. Making his content harder to get will reduce his legitimacy. Con men and frauds should not be treated with respect or debated. Also, Jones specifically used his platform to abuse people, so this is not just about being full of shit all the time.

"They don't want you to hear this" gives a lot of credibility to ideas that don't deserve it.

Re: YouTube Bans Alex Jones, Following Facebook's and Apple's Lead

#159

Post by tchaffee »

acct1771 wrote: post #151
tchaffee wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forcing YouTube, Facebook, or the side of your house to host Alex Jones' content is inhibiting freedom of speech. People and companies have a right to not say things. If they don't, then please let me know when Alex Jones will be setting aside some of his website and paying for the hosting for my views. I have a lot to say. It would be great to piggy back on his 10 million visitors a month and get a free audience.

When you become large enough that you are effectively replacing the town square, you have an extraordinary responsibility to let everyone have their soap box, because otherwise, you are dictating public opinion. For better or for worse, the ideas that grasp the most people have prevailed historically. Letting one small group of people, regardless of how they're chosen, or how self-righteous they feel, decide what's o…

Who will enforce that responsibility? Who decides what's large enough?

> Letting one small group of people

What one small group of people? There are literally thousands of social media sites, and people are completely free to join or quit any one of them. If there were no competition in this space, I might be concerned. But just a few short years ago Facebook was unheard of and MySpace was the "monopoly".

Let customers choose. The customers are not one small group of people.

Re: YouTube Bans Alex Jones, Following Facebook's and Apple's Lead

#160

Post by joering2 »

dang wrote: post #127
joering2 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay I feed the troll. So how much of the proof we got that Michelle Obama IS actually a women? Her look? Many transgander look much more womanish than she does. Same sex marriage? Could be? Have you seen her birth certificate (original, NOT the copy) that you can genuinely say she is a female? Yes I know she has the kids... okay so let me see their DNA test that actually they belong to Michelle as a parent. Exactly;…

Please don't do this here.

care to elaborate ?
Post reply on HN