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

YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 1001 posts

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#341

Post by seppin »

roenxi wrote: post #336
bosswipe wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks to Google, Facebook and the others this is the golden era of being able to widely disseminate your alternate theories on everything. If that is your definition of freedom then you are less oppressed then any other humans in history.

Some people would like freedom to discuss the coronavirus without being oppressed. They can't on YouTube if this policy takes hold. The sort of people who contradict the WHO happened to be right on this one; they predicted a problem early and tended to pre-empt the WHO on upcoming problems. This was also expected , because the WHO only advises stuff that is already obvious to everyone. Interested parties can offer be…

> freedom to discuss the coronavirus

Unfortunately platforms that reach billions must prioritize the danger of misinformation spreading that far and wide over allowing for every dangerous and wrong opinion.

The complete and total censorship you fear never emerges, Youtube if anything is far too lenient on allowing terrible opinions to linger on their platform. They never do away with anything besides the most harmful, hate filled rhetoric.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#342

Post by MisterBastahrd »

tomp wrote: post #228
zknz wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a denial. It's a we have yet to confirm.

But surely the prudent, cautious way of wording a non-denial would be "no clear evidence of the impossibility of human-to-human transmission"?

And how do you go about testing that hypothesis except for placing infected people next to uninfected people and watching for them to become infected?

Their phrasing is correct and so is their methodology.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#343

Post by __s »

wolco wrote: post #244
brobinson wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Yet we all knew you meant Rhode Island by saying Newport.

I didn't

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#344

Post by MisterBastahrd »

hartator wrote: post #84

Not even mentioning they are playing a dangerous censorhip game, it's very weird that they pick the WHO over the CDC after all the WHO controversies. (Taiwan, slow COVID-19 response, alignment with China lines, head of WHO was part of the corrupt Ethiopian government, $200M in business class travel, and probably more scandals.) CDC has also a way bigger budget than the WHO. $11.1B vs $4.2B. Ref: - https://en.wikipedi…

You mean the same CDC that is part of a hilariously corrupt US government?

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#345

Post by core-questions »

brobinson wrote: post #187
core-questions wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should try talking to a Taiwanese person to see what they think, instead of being a shill for PRC.

See my edit. I'm 100% pro-ROC and 100% anti-PRC. Calling the ROC and its other non-Taiwan holdings "Taiwan" helps the PRC with their "Taiwan is a province of China" narrative. First time I, a stringent anti-communist, have ever been called a PRC shill. There's zero chance I'd be allowed to enter the PRC if they can see my internet posting history.

So why not simply declare Taiwan to be a country de-facto, despite a bunch of governments who suck up to China pretending otherwise? Who gets to decide what a "country" is?

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#346

Post by doctoboggan »

logifail wrote: post #121

Current 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…

So if you made a video a few weeks ago recommending people wear masks then your video would be banned.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#347

Post by chriscaruso »

I see this as fine for the case where someone is saying "it's fine assemble in large groups" or other negative contradictions.

But it's not ok for cases where someone is advising being more restrictive or cautious or other positive contradictions.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#348

Post by IAmGraydon »

We can all debate who is right or wrong as much as we like, but you can be certain of one thing - right and wrong are not what drives the decisions of large companies like Google. What matters most to them is potential profit vs risk. Allowing their platform to be used for dissemination of potentially harmful advice puts them squarely at risk for lawsuits and bad press, both of which have very highly potential costs. At the same time, it presents relatively little potential profit. If someone is harmed following the advice they found on their platform, YouTube was just following WHO advice. The finger is pointed and the risk transferred elsewhere. From a business perspective, it becomes a very easy decision for them.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#349

Post by throwbackThurs »

robrenaud wrote: post #311
stcredzero wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Germany bans holocaust denial. That seems fine.

[dead]

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus-related content that directly contradicts WHO advice

#350

Post by sneak »

knzhou wrote: post #257
sneak wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Screenshot: https://twitter.com/Austen/status/1245689629178650624 The ambiguity between their various statements at that time, taken together, just furthers my point that those statements should not be immune from dialog, criticism, verification/falsification, and discussion of those results. YouTube has banned that.

"No clear evidence" uncovered in a "preliminary investigation" was a completely true statement. They never ever said "okay, this definitely isn't transmissible, everybody can ignore it". They said in the early stages that it was too soon to be sure. All the other tweets from this period are saying the same thing: something might be coming, so countries should prepare.

You can constrain your statements to only objectively true things and still be confusing and ambiguous. This is a perfect example of that. It warrants criticism.
Post reply on HN