Live data from Hacker News

YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

nytimes.com

291–300 of 744 posts

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#291
post #193

That's fine if we can agree on what is an "extreme view". YouTube has already decided that academic software vulnerability exploitation proof-of-concept videos are "dangerous content", which results in video removal and a strike on your account.

53% of millenials have a favorable view of socialism today. But in th 20th century when we were fighting wars to "contain" it, we had senators keeping lists of people they suspected had favorable opinions of it. It used to be an extreme view.

This seems like another example of containment, but it's scary because what's normal today might be an extreme view tomorrow... and what's extreme today could be normal tomorrow. As much as I detest the idea of ideas like white supremecy spreading, I'm not sure I like the idea of fighting it by hiding it from view.

Yesterday was the anniversary of Tiananmen square. China avoided democracy by hiding all evidence of this terrible event. I think most people can agree the government hiding the truth is wrong, but if social media is the new public square (which the supreme court in a way ruled to be true when it ruled Trump can't block his tweets), I think these ideals of not hiding information still applies. The 1st amendment, and what it stands for is truely in jeopody with these actions.

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#292
post #193

That's fine if we can agree on what is an "extreme view". YouTube has already decided that academic software vulnerability exploitation proof-of-concept videos are "dangerous content", which results in video removal and a strike on your account.

An extreme view is anything that may reduce income by making advertisers leave.

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#293

I'm starting to think that comment sections on news sites are a really bad idea. At first I thought NPR and the like were cowards for removing theirs. It's bad enough that NYT can be pretty biased on its own, but the comment sections are always full of low-tier thinking that just push whatever narrative is currently in the Overton window. What I find distressing is how people remark that a telecom and advertising gia…

They can choose to not be a platform for anything that they want. You don't have a right to that platform. Forcing YouTube to leave everything up infringes on their rights to run their site as they want.

To play devil's advocate to the "private platform" argument: we force tv networks and radio stations to give equal air time to all presidential candidates.[1] NBC is a private a company but if they permit one candidate to host SNL they must give the other candidate(s) an equivalent opportunity so as not to unfairly sway public opinion. I don't necessarily think that "infringes" on NBC's right to run their platform as they want. They're still given the option of whether or not they want to wade into politics on their airways but once they do they're obligated to open their platform to both sides.

Now you could argue that Donald Trump expertly exploited exceptions to the "equal-time rule" in order to get much more coverage than his competition, but that's more to do with the structure of the law than the spirit of what it's trying to accomplish.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal-time_rule

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about people with conservative religious beliefs that others perceive to be exclusionary?

"But what about..." "But what about..." NO. We're talking about people who want to exterminate other people. We know that because the last time they got power, we had mass executions (Holocaust), lynchings, and a century of extreme segregation. This isn't a 'what-if'. We know what happened the last time. Never again.

We have people who don't want to exterminate anyone being described as 'fascists' for supporting until-recently-uncontroversial immigration controls.

If half of the US is described as extreme, then we can justify shutting down their voices.

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WW2.

White supremacy can be reasonably credited for the Holocaust, but not for the war itself. The usual intervention after a major war was for a few hundred years to carve up the major belligerent into smaller states. This happened fairly regularly throughout the early modern period but curiously stopped being a thing after the Napoleonic wars. I suspect this is because carving France back up into kingdoms at that point…

> but not for the war itself.

Have you never heard of Lebensraum? Generalplan Ost?

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#296

Good. Online radicalism is a thing. To all the people here who are decrying this as “censorship”, remember that during the early 2010s, Islamic radicals were getting radicalized on YouTube by pretty benign sermons (Ex: Awlaki and his “tour of Paradise” lectures that inspired Boston 2013, fort hood and a bunch of other international attacks). YouTube removed all that out and I think Muslims getting radicalized on YouT…

Those looking to be radicalized will look at this as an example of the conspiracy. Look at QAnon. Or look at things like Conservapedia: https://www.conservapedia.com/Paul_Manafort Go ahead and read that article on Paul Manafort. That's just one, mundane article—you could pick any. Understand that, true or false, it doesn't matter anymore—this is a narrative and a set of facts that around 100 million people in the Uni…

> But I DO know that removing videos from YouTube won't make it better. It may make it worse.

I think you're right, and I have some first-hand knowledge on the matter. I've debated QAnon types and flat earthers alike. In both cases, they often see an absence of information as some overarching conspiracy. I'm not really sure who is worse (the flat earthers are a subset of a broader "government-is-hiding-things" conspiracy), but they both follow a cult-like structure in that if you disagree with them, you're not "one of us" and are either not smart enough to understand the implications of their beliefs or are willfully blind to their "truth." I doubt YT would ever remove QAnon or flat earth videos, but if they did, I suspect the fallout would be far worse than just leaving them alone. In some cases, it's helpful to cite their own predictions (and have something to cite) to dismantle their argument! Admittedly, this isn't useful in direct debate, because they're forever moving the goalpost, but it can be helpful for illustrating deficiencies to third parties that might be sympathetic to their views but are still open to the idea that there are problems with the opposition's argument[1].

Now, I say this as a conservative with some libertarian leanings. I don't like censorship, and I think it's harmful to shield people from ideas they don't like. However, I think moderation within a community is incredibly important to its survival provided it is applied equally. Nothing is worse for reasonable discourse than having someone jump in and start slinging pejoratives, insults, and abuse for no other reason than they don't like what you've said. As an example, I've personally had someone stalk my admittedly limited social media presence across various sites in order to post screenshots "proving" some inane belief they had about me supporting some ridiculous conspiracy. They then repeatedly posted insults and diatribes across numerous unrelated comments until I blocked them. That type of behavior should be an immediate--and permanent--ban.

[1] We might be passed this point, because the number of undecided people with regards to any particular conspiracy (for or against) is diminishing. I used to think the flat earth groups were largely trolling, but I've spoken with some people who have encountered them in real life or have friends who have been duped into believing the conspiracy. I also know a small handful of people who believe QAnon. No amount of evidence is going to sway either party. And no, I don't know what the best solution is other than to continue engaging where appropriate and banning where there's abuse.

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume based on my own use of it and pretty much all the memes and anecdotes from everyone. I make no assumptions about what people are exposed to outside of YouTube. It’s not the platforms job to challenge one’s views, rather one’s views are naturally challenged when in an open marketplace of ideas. YouTube isn’t an open marketplace of ideas. It is effectively a curated presentation of ideas, customized to each in…

>I assume based on my own use of it and pretty much all the memes and anecdotes from everyone. Well, now that its clear that it is simply an assumption/speculation, then I have no problem with anything you say. Your original comment seemed to imply that this is a demonstrable fact. >It’s not the platforms job to challenge one’s views, rather one’s views are naturally challenged when in an open marketplace of ideas. A…

I cannot speak to “these videos” as I do not know their exact content for each video. I’m against removing content because it is “extreme” or objectionable or even abhorrent. I am pro free speech and willing to pay the cost of allowing speech I disagree with so long as it is “protected” speech.

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#298

From the article: 'The new policy will ban “videos alleging that a group is superior in order to justify discrimination, segregation or exclusion,” the company said in a blog post.' Is this going to include videos that mention "white privilege" (which one could argue alleges superiority of white people) in which white people are asked to "check their privilege" in some way (which one could argue is an attempt to just…

I assume these rules also won't apply to the ethnic group of most of Alphabet/YouTube's top management (Susan Wojcicki, Larry Page, Sergey Brin, etc.). I'm sure you will still be able to post videos in support of Israel and it's right to exclude and discriminate against those who are not racially Jewish.

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> White supremacy is a much bigger deal with a worse tail risk Do you have anything to support that assertion?

WW2.

The war where a bunch of white and Asian people fought against a bunch of white and Asian people? The one where the Nazis said that the Japanese, Arabs, even Jews could be "honorary Aryans" when it was convenient for the cause?

Re: YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

#300
post #232
post #15

Why do some people think they're entitled to say what they want on youtube?

Probably because it's literally what YouTube is? Why do you think a nation of free speaking individuals is patently not entitled to say what they want on a platform specifically created to allow people to say whatever they want? To be absolutely clear on my position, I am not saying YouTube is acting outside their rights to censor content. But I am very much saying people have a right to be peeved about the bait and…

It’s disengenuous to say that YouTube didn’t have rules before this. This is just another rule on what’s allowed. Is it wise? I don’t know, probably. In America white supremacy is a rising problem and they are getting radicalized by YouTube and the economics of hate for profit making a lot of money by recommending the more clickbaity extreme videos. They are perhaps correcting the course. Perhaps they are overreacting. We will see where the chips lie after this.

Edit. I looked at the way back on YouTube’s tou from when the site was a dating site and it’s always disallowed hateful content regarding race or other things. This seems like a clarification on that provision.

Post reply on HN