I get my Coronavirus info from following people on twitter - who are mostly honest even if biased and understand that there is a lot of unknown and being honest about it the best place to start.
YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
261–270 of 1001 posts
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that's contradicting. Directly contradicting would be "Don't wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with COVID-19". What you described sounds more like extending the current WHO recommendations.
Only in the same sense that "take vitamin C" is an extension of the WHO recommendations, and Wojcicki explicitly mentioned that as an example of what's banned.
My understanding here, from the quote in the article, is that one is ok to say 'Take vitamin C', but it is not ok to say 'Take vitamin C, it will cure you [of x]'.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#263Prior to March 3rd, the official position of the WHO was that
"The flu is worse"
I don't expect the WHO to be infalliable, and I don't think this reflects malice or incompetence (they updated as information became available) but that's kind of my point. The WHO is not infalliable. The things they say are not gospel truth. Categorically banning discussion of anything that contradicts what they say is a horrendous measure that will suppress critical information, because _even the WHO_ contradicts the WHO. If the WHO is wrong again, but we are not allowed to discuss it, we will never find out. We will instead _enforce_ incorrect information, and people will die.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#264Is this the beginning of the end for YouTube? As someone who deeply hates how much fake news have been spreading in the past few years, I still find this very worrying, especially since the WHO has been very inconsistent with their messaging during this pandemic [1] and sometimes plain wrong [2]. [1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-who/who-chie... [2] https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152
> [2] https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152
Go back and actually read the full set of WHO statements in mid-January. They have a bunch of statements saying that nations should get prepared, one saying that specific studies haven’t yet found hard evidence for person-to-person transmission (because at that point most of the cases they’d managed to find were tied to the market). The WHO never, ever said that it can’t be transmitted, and they absolutely never said that people should do nothing about COVID-19. They were urging nations to act for months before they actually did.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#265The concept of 'fake news' was invented to bring power back into the hands of large media companies and the corporations which control them by discrediting all alternative news sources. I don't believe in fake news or conspiracy theories, but I do read conspiracy media and articles from 'fake news' outlets because it helps to get perspective. There is definitely a grain of truth in many conspiracy theories and 'fake…
> This is a fact but mainstream media does not mention it at all because they don't want to invite conspiracy theories that the virus could be man-made.
Your statement is false. I searched my scraped database of local mainstream news an there were several articles mentioning coronavirus/HIV and a few dicussing the link of the two and/or describing the supposed conspiracy.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sometimes, I'll hear someone talk about a place called "Virginia", and I'll have no idea what they are talking about. Eventually, I figure out through context clues that they are referring to the Commonwealth of Virginia. I wish they would save me the time of having to constantly explain why they are wrong.
Bad analogy. This would be like people calling Rhode Island "Newport". The official state name is (the State of) "Rhode Island" (and Providence Plantations), and calling it by the name of one of its territories makes no sense.
Tangential factoid: often people (especially tourists) say Newport when they actually mean Aquidneck Island.
Source: I've lived in that area.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#267Prior to March 3rd, the official position of the WHO was that "The flu is worse" I don't expect the WHO to be infalliable, and I don't think this reflects malice or incompetence (they updated as information became available) but that's kind of my point. The WHO is not infalliable. The things they say are not gospel truth. Categorically banning discussion of anything that contradicts what they say is a horrendous meas…
> Prior to March 3rd, the official position of the WHO was that "The flu is worse"
This is a lie, and the product of many different organizations flat out making up claims about the WHO to deflect blame away from themselves.
The WHO has been telling nations to prepare since January. I mean, I'm an ordinary citizen and I got clued in to preparing in January from their statements.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
Edit: since people are misunderstanding this post, I am 100% pro-ROC and anti-PRC. I wish the ROC could rename itself to something else without triggering a PRC invasion. Check my comment history. I'm 100% pro-ROC and I support the ROC's continued (since 1912) independence as a sovereign entity. 中華民國萬歲 "Taiwan" isn't a country. It's an island controlled by the Republic of China alongside its other holdings. The ROC i…
Taiwan has: - a military - a government - a language - a judicial system - foreign relations, however hampered they are by the Communist party It also happens to be in a state of cold war with their nominally Communist neighbour. If it's not a country, nothing is.
On the military and foreign relation really matters in this list. In my understanding, the only reason these two still exists is because US is backing them up since WW2.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#269Things like this are tricky to me. YouTube is a private platform, so they can make their own decisions, but any sort of censorship is scary to me. I honestly don't know where to stand when it comes to issues related to censoring content like this. On one hand, you can limit information we know is false, but restricting spread of information is censoring people, something that is pretty widely regarded as oppressive.…
Yes, they are private and can do what they want... and we can judge them harshly for it. What’s legal and what’s moral aren’t the same thing.
Fully agreed.
I think that YouTube is in absolute legal right to ban whatever content they want, and I wouldn't want that legal right taken away from them (or any other content platform).
However, I absolutely disagree with this specific ban on their end, and it deserves to be criticized. But, again, they shouldn't be legally restricted from making this decision, no matter how poor I believe the decision is.
Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice
#270Current WHO advice: "If you are healthy, you only need to wear a mask if you are taking care of a person with COVID-19." [0] Where we live, due to local laws , we are now obliged to wear a mask to go shopping. Can one discuss that on YouTube, or would one be contradicting the WHO? I fear there isn't "one truth" out there, despite the content providers' and fact-checkers' attempts :( We keep trying to encourage our ki…
I fear there isn't "one truth" out there, despite the content providers' and fact-checkers' attempts :(
The idea is: "We are the decent, good, people who know the truth. Now we control the platforms, so it's only well and good we control the information, and we tell the deplorable others what they can and can't say."
Almost everyone in the history books as a horrible oppressor has told themselves that narrative. Many of them were brave, noble, and well meaning, and had an ideology that told them they were in the right.
How are the employees of YouTube or any tech company exempt from those forces? What makes them somehow wiser or smarter than everyone else in history?