YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

The YouTube statement was not, really, about the WHO. It was an interview. Wojcicki was pointing out that they'll be removing "medically unsubstantiated" content like 5G conspiracy theories, and as an example said that anything that clearly contradicts the WHO would likely not qualify.

The decision to put "WHO" up there in the lede seems to be click baiting on the part of the BBC. Frustratingly I can't find a link to a transcript of the original interview, or even an indication from the article about who it was with.

More concerning is that the proponents have "good intentions" at heart.

It's almost as if the concept of freedom is not understood.

Freedom is not free.

Freedom has a price, often a heavy price that one has to pay for it.

The fact that we are not children anymore who desparately need oversight and constant handholding, seems to be an alien concept.

"Oh! What do you do about those YouTUbe videos that tell you to drink bleach because it saves you from SARS-COV2!"

Well, I watch that video and research what the potential effects of drinking bleach even if there was no SARS-COV2 in this world would be and then weigh the potential effects of a COVID-19 infection and weigh the options.

This is, what I assumed, were the responsibilites of an adult - a process to make rational decisions instead of being spoonfed and told what to do like one would a child.

As I clarified elsewhere on this thread, the point I was making wasn't "liars, cranks and con artists don't exist, and no one gets to decide otherwise."

It was "liars, cranks and con artists do exist, and we need to empower people to decide which is which by letting them practise."

Yes, being an adult means having the freedom to drink alcohol and drive a car instead of waiting for a bus or a parent to come pick me up.

It also means having the responsibilities of making my own decisions instead of waiting for someone else to do it for me.

What's the expectation - that if the decision making authority makes a wrong decision that kills me, I can then blame them and collect damages?

That's crazy talk - for one, I will be dead already!

More concerning is that the proponents have "good intentions" at heart.

It's almost as if the concept of freedom is not understood.

Freedom is not free.

Freedom has a price, often a heavy price that one has to pay for it.

The fact that we are not children anymore who desparately need oversight and constant handholding, seems to be an alien concept.

"Oh! What do you do about those YouTUbe videos that tell you to drink bleach because it saves you from SARS-COV2!"

Well, I watch that video and research what the potential effects of drinking bleach even if there was no SARS-COV2 in this world would be and then weigh the potential effects of a COVID-19 infection and weigh the options.

This is, what I assumed, were the responsibilites of an adult - a process to make rational decisions instead of being spoonfed and told what to do like one would a child.

As I clarified elsewhere on this thread, the point I was making wasn't "liars, cranks and con artists don't exist, and no one gets to decide otherwise."

It was "liars, cranks and con artists do exist, and we need to empower people to decide which is which by letting them practise."

Yes, being an adult means having the freedom to drink alcohol and drive a car instead of waiting for a bus or a parent to come pick me up.

It also means having the responsibilities of making my own decisions instead of waiting for someone else to do it for me.

What's the expectation - that if the decision making authority makes a wrong decision that kills me, I can then blame them and collect damages?

That's crazy talk - for one, I will be dead already!

Apparently I have hit the nerves of lots of people from my parent post and since I am and like to be publicly accessible, people who disliked my thoughts have really let me know what they think of me and where I belong :D

I am noticing, increasingly in the country I live in - the U.S., an extremely concerning attitude towards love for censorship.

More concerning is that the proponents have "good intentions" at heart.

It's almost as if the concept of freedom is not understood.

Freedom is not free.

Freedom has a price, often a heavy price that one has to pay for it.

The fact that we are not children anymore who desparately need oversight and constant handholding, seems to be an alien concept.

"Oh! What do you do about those YouTUbe videos that tell you to drink bleach because it saves you from SARS-COV2!"

Well, I watch that video and research what the potential effects of drinking bleach even if there was no SARS-COV2 in this world would be and then weigh the potential effects of a COVID-19 infection and weigh the options.

This is, what I assumed, were the responsibilites of an adult - a process to make rational decisions instead of being spoonfed and told what to do like one would a child.

As I clarified elsewhere on this thread, the point I was making wasn't "liars, cranks and con artists don't exist, and no one gets to decide otherwise."

It was "liars, cranks and con artists do exist, and we need to empower people to decide which is which by letting them practise."

Yes, being an adult means having the freedom to drink alcohol and drive a car instead of waiting for a bus or a parent to come pick me up.

It also means having the responsibilities of making my own decisions instead of waiting for someone else to do it for me.

What's the expectation - that if the decision making authority makes a wrong decision that kills me, I can then blame them and collect damages?

That's crazy talk - for one, I will be dead already!

https://sneak.berlin/20200421/normalcy-bias/

(Note well that this exceptionally dangerous failure mode is based simply on the existence of the technological capability of mass instant censorship, not the merit of the specific editorial decisions of what content is censored or not.)

Furthermore, in any crisis or rapidly evolving situation, any one organization deeming themselves the sole arbiter of truth is extremely dangerous. What is true one day we learn with more information is false the next. You may recall this is the same WHO who said that healthy people get no benefit from wearing masks, and that also parroted China’s line about no human-to-human transmission. They are not immune to criticism, nor should they be.

Do you trust Google and the WHO to be superhuman, prescient and perfectly informed at all times? I don’t. (I also don’t think it’s any adult’s business telling another adult what they should or should not be able to read or watch.)

YouTube’s other censorship efforts have been actively impeding the research and prosecution of war crimes in the Syrian war as they are deleting hundreds of thousands of videos, amounting to destruction of evidence.

Either YouTube needs to stop being the default video upload target for most of internet-connected Earth, or they need to stop doing this shit. The current situation is far too dangerous.

Instagram/Facebook are even worse. Same problem.

These point-and-click mass censorship platforms are ticking time bombs for society-wide abuse even if they don’t censor anything most days of most decades.