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

561–570 of 1001 posts

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

#561

Post by etangent »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #514
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…

This is how all news media operated before the internet created mouthpieces for non-professionals. In addition to suppressing some inconvenient truths they filtered out crackpot ideas that have become a plague in modern times.

This comment has so much elitism in it I can smell the grey poupon from across the wire.

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

#562

Post by CamperBob2 »

EGreg wrote: post #490
CamperBob2 wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously it's good advice to wear masks in public when confronted with a respiratory disease capable of asymptomatic transmission for days after infection. The masks don't make any one person safer, but widespread usage makes us all safer. Trouble is, there weren't enough masks at first. It's not clear that there are now, for that matter. One of the few things Trump is correct about is that the WHO has bungled this…

The CDC guidelines you’ve linked to continue to say surgical masks should be for medical personnel. This is ridiculous!! A mask is a cloth on a string. We are how many months into this thing... why hasn’t our private industry created enough cloths on strings???? What is the shortage? Is it the cloth? It’s because the politicians were reactionary and behind on the most basic things every step of the way. Why not order…

The CDC is making a distinction between surgical masks and non-medical grade masks, which is fine. They will both reduce the likelihood that an asymptomatic person will transmit the disease, but the former should be reserved for medical personnel when possible.

The WHO doesn't appear to be drawing any such distinction, at least at first glance.

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

#563

Post by jshevek »

glenstein wrote: post #431
OrderlyTiamat wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with the conclusion that you should be clear about what percentage of content is on the side of reasonable, and which is not. Let me however disagree strongly with your claims that this concerns 99.99999% of cases, and that the other commenter was talking about "what ifs" and "hypotheticals". That last claim seems to me to just be untrue: we know in fact that local laws, for example several american states, c…

The 99.99999% case scenario concerns videos that are saying '5g caused coronavirus', and meanwhile you're trying to tie up everybodies attention with special cases that don't represent the majority of cases. People get disoriented with special cases and trick questions. Let me put it this way. If you're not just pointing to the mask example as a tentative, academic exercise, and sincerely believe that they constitute…

>The 99.99999% case scenario concerns videos that are saying '5g caused coronavirus'

If this were the case, they could simply announce that their policy is to ban videos that blame coronavirus on 5G.

In practice, they will probably be banning a lot more videos than simply ones which blame coronavirus on 5G.

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

#564

Post by busymom0 »

xster wrote: post #542
busymom0 wrote: post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taiwan emailed WHO in December warning about China lying about the human-to-human transmission not happening and WHO refused to acknowledge Taiwan's reports. Then on January 14th, WHO tweeted saying human to human transmission was not possible. Then when it came out that they were wrong, they claimed Taiwan never emailed them. Taiwan brought receipts with the emails. Also the WHO spokesman went on an interview with H…

Seems like a goalpost shift since I was just responding to your claim about "Taiwan sovereignty". And since you brought up the December 31st email, that only amplifies my point about corporate media if you formed your opinion on editorials obfuscating the primary source rather than the primary source itself. Here's the actual email from Taiwan https://twitter.com/mohw_taiwan/status/1248915057188024320 "News resources…

You are proving my very point. The twitter email you linked specifically says "atypical pneumonia".

> In China, the term “atypical pneumonia” is commonly used to refer to SARS, a disease transmitted between humans caused by coronavirus.

"transmitted between humans" - what WHO claimed does not happen even though Taiwan warned them about it.

> patients had been isolated for treatment

That's also referring to the human-to-human transmission part of COVID - which WHO denied. This is the warning Taiwan had sent in December and WHO lied and went even further to state that they never received any email from Taiwan. It's literally in the email. I don't know how much clearer they can get.

> Meanwhile, people who just read corporate media headlines and don't bother with primary sources or critical thinking goes around telling people "Taiwan emailed WHO in December warning about China lying about the human-to-human transmission".

You trying to claim I don't have critical thinking makes you sound arrogant. I don't want to engage in flame wars on HN so it's not replying to it further.

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

#565

Post by 0xy »

knzhou wrote: post #478
graeme wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The WHO denied human-to-human transmission even after Taiwan told them about it, and they dug their heels on calling the outbreak a pandemic for weeks. I think it depends how youtube draws the line. If they’re removing stuff like “use colloidial silver” or “no need to wash your hands” then sure. But the WHO is not gospel.

> The WHO denied human-to-human transmission This is one of those completely false things that people only believe is true by repetition. 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 ca…

"Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China"

https://twitter.com/who/status/1217043229427761152

(this is CCP propaganda and they had zero access at the time, and it was after Taiwan told them about human-to-human transmission)

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

#566

Post by 0xy »

xster wrote: post #508
graeme wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The WHO denied human-to-human transmission even after Taiwan told them about it, and they dug their heels on calling the outbreak a pandemic for weeks. I think it depends how youtube draws the line. If they’re removing stuff like “use colloidial silver” or “no need to wash your hands” then sure. But the WHO is not gospel.

Can you be specific on > The WHO denied human-to-human transmission even after Taiwan told them about it I don't think anyone on HN needs to be told that "there are no clear evidence of human to human transmission" is not the same as "there are evidence that human to human transmission is not possible" which is how everyone is trying their hardest to interpret it as. > even after Taiwan told them about it Do you have…

Taiwan told them about human-to-human transmission in December, and the WHO responded by repeating CCP propaganda verbatim in January saying there was no evidence of it.

Note that at the time WHO had zero access to China, because of the cover-up ongoing.

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

#567

Post by jshevek »

glenstein wrote: post #494
OrderlyTiamat wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, than I don't know what to say to you. I have already explained my view on the proportions, I have already given argument and explanation for it, and you seem to be intent on not supporting your own conclusions apart from a rather lame "you're a contrarianist" argument. Why not actually defend your arguments and attack mine instead of circling about the issue with "this actual real life example is a what if hypo…

>(Particularly this hammering that these are contrived examples is bordering on the ridiculous: we know this is true!) I'm just going to note you agree that these examples are contrived yet nevertheless want to debate them, apparently to performatively exhibit your appreciation for the values open-mindedness and free speech. That's a not a constructive use of anybody's time. It's a frivolous distraction. Youtube is d…

>Youtube is doing what they can to save lives by stopping misinformation...

I'm shocked that anyone would believe that this is an honest framing of YouTube's motivation.

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

#568

Post by 0xy »

jimsmart wrote: post #280
cryptochromium wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) identified in #Wuhan, #China," https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152?s=20

Actually, technically that is the WHO summarising results from preliminary investigations by the Chinese authorities. Saying that that is the WHO making that claim is incorrect, a kind of logical fallacy. It's like a newspaper reporting on the words/claims of a celeb or politician, and folk claiming that those words/claims were actually the newspaper's claims.

Do you think repeating propaganda designed to cover-up a huge outbreak is responsible for such an organization? At the time of that tweet they had zero access to China.

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

#569

Post by anigbrowl »

throwaway_jobs wrote: post #520
xster wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> claims that covid does not spread from human to human after it was abundantly clear that it does There's evidence that human to human transmission was documented on January 14? That would be the first time I hear about it. Do you have a source?

Yes Dr. Li contracted the virus on January 8 when he returned to the hospital in Wuhan where the first patients were identified in December 2019. Dr. Li made social media posts about the virus which Chinese authorities forced him to take down and sign a written confession and promise not to do it again. Now the question is do you have a source that shows the exact steps, if any, the WHO took to verify the “preliminar…

'There is no clear evidence from the preliminary investigation' and 'the preliminary investigation finds that human-to-human transmission is not taking place' are two quite different propositions. The WHO opted for an excess of scientific caution - partly to avoid pissing off China, partly out of fears of being accused of alarmism, which have since been validated in spades.

Now while I agree that WHO is a poor yardstick of scientific truth, that is a long way from saying it's useless. With all its faults I prefer to the disinformation and quackery that are flying about, and indeed pouring out of the White House.

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

#570

Post by 0xy »

ajross wrote: post #201
subhobroto wrote: post #21

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. WHO is a political organization with medical leanings just like Fox News is an entertainment channel that covers newslike topics. Yes, there's a lot of information out there about SARS-COV2 and COVID-19 infections out there that are downright misleading at best and life threatening at worst. No, censoring that content including videos is NOT the role of a hosting platfo…

> WHO is a political organization 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. Fr…

Google has a long history of partnering with partisan political organizations to police content, including Politifact and the Washington Post, among others.

WHO is just another example.

Post reply on HN