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

YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

theblaze.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 714 posts

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#601

Post by James_Henry »

teh_infallible wrote: post #475
cowholio4 wrote: post #309

Not only were they completely wrong with their numbers, they even were wrong in their assessment of Fauci. They said they “are actually seeing the patients, Dr Fauci hasn’t seen a patient in 20 years.” In 2015, Dr Fauci personally helped take care of an Ebola patient when most of the world was terrified of Ebola. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/03/why-nihs-anthony-fau...

Maybe they were wrong, and maybe they weren’t. If we can’t see their video, we will never know.

You can still see their video. It's on plenty of other sites and there are copies of it on Youtube.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#602

Post by balls187 »

JackFr wrote: post #487
balls187 wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should they have that right though? Yes. Free speech does not grant the right for anyone to say whatever they want. The US Surpreme court has, as a matter of case law, ruled in specific areas to restrict free speech. These two doctors, under the pretense of medical expertise, provided false information, and used Youtube to do it. Google being a large massive publicly traded entity does not have any bearing as to it…

> These two doctors, under the pretense of medical expertise, provided false information, and used Youtube to do it. Not according to the article. The local TV station interviewed them and the local TV station put the video on YouTube. Presumably as they are licensed to practice medicine in the State of California they do have some expertise greater than those of us without MDs so it's hardly 'pretense'. Is wearing s…

> Not according to the article. The local TV station interviewed them and the local TV station put the video on YouTube.

As noted in another comment, the article does not touch on the veracity of the claims of these two doctors.

"In a rare statement late today, the American College of Emergency Physicians and the American Academy of Emergency Medicine declared they “emphatically condemn the recent opinions released by Dr. Daniel Erickson and Dr. Artin Messihi. These reckless and untested musings do not speak for medical societies and are inconsistent with current science and epidemiology regarding COVID-19. As owners of local urgent care clinics, it appears these two individuals are releasing biased, non-peer reviewed data to advance their personal financial interests without regard for the public’s health.”"

Source: https://www.dailynews.com/2020/04/28/california-doctors-with...

> We have to sit through three years of the echo chamber telling us Donald Trump is a fascist, and then finally when our freedom to assemble is literally stripped from us by the police power of the state, people are complaining that he's not fascist enough. Geez.

You're making a false analogy; US Government in times of emergency has used it's authority to curtail civil liberties; I'm sure you are well aware of the gist of the War Times Power Act. And perhaps most famously (and more controversialy) when Habeas Corpus was suspended.

That said, I think it's our responsibility (duty) as citizens to continually challenge attacks on the 1st Amendment, and other curtails of constitutional protected freedoms, but it's also on us to hold accountable those who seek to use the rights granted by the Bill of Rights in ways that harm the public.

It is my pov that the opinions, presented as medical facts by these two doctors, were harmful to the public, and should be censored.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#603

Post by balls187 »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #464
Gibbon1 wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I think of it is. Say my company makes high voltage transformers. And I get wind that one customer is using them to manufacture interrogation devices. I sure as shit can tell them to take their business elsewhere.

But if you're selling electricity you generally don't get to refuse service to anyone.

Google doesn't sell ip packets.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#604

Post by robdachshund »

dependenttypes wrote: post #592
lucio wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free speech DOES grant the right for anyone express opinions without interference from the government. SCOTUS limitations for freedom of speech are very narrow, and being wrong or against the mainstream opinion is not one of them.

> SCOTUS limitations for freedom of speech are very narrow Are they though? I can think of all kinds of limitations of the freedom of speech in both the US and in Europe. Copyright, gag orders, company and military secrets, illegal numbers, etc.

Freedom of speech is not a protected right in European countries. It is a solely american concept

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#605

Post by balls187 »

lucio wrote: post #504
balls187 wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should they have that right though? Yes. Free speech does not grant the right for anyone to say whatever they want. The US Surpreme court has, as a matter of case law, ruled in specific areas to restrict free speech. These two doctors, under the pretense of medical expertise, provided false information, and used Youtube to do it. Google being a large massive publicly traded entity does not have any bearing as to it…

Free speech DOES grant the right for anyone express opinions without interference from the government. SCOTUS limitations for freedom of speech are very narrow, and being wrong or against the mainstream opinion is not one of them.

> and being wrong or against the mainstream opinion is not one of them.

False statement of Fact is absolutely an Exception to Free Speech.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#606

Post by slenk »

gccxsse wrote: post #600
Barrin92 wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What gives Google/YouTube the justification to silence them? The fact that it is their platform. >Fauci can defend himself, Fauci is a 79 year old man busy working 20 hours a day trying to stop more people from dying, he doesn't have the time to debunk garbage on the internet. Youtube is completely within their rights to remove dangerous disinformation from their platform and I hope they take an agressive stance goi…

>dangerous disinformation What does this even mean?? Have we forgotten the importance of free speech?

Free Speech allows you to say whatever you want, not guarantee you no repercussions.

Besides, private businesses don't need to allow free speech...

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#607

Post by eloff »

vharuck wrote: post #210
eloff wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By that logic can they remove videos claiming masks are effective at protecting yourself and society from the virus? Because I seem to recall the WHO (or I think it was the CDC?) blatantly lying about the efficacy of masks in order to keep them available to health professionals. I think this underscores why I'm so uncomfortable with YouTube doing censorship (or anyone doing it). The official narrative is not always r…

>By that logic can they remove videos claiming masks are effective at protecting yourself and society from the virus? Cry wolf when this actually happens. I try not to be dismissive, but the repeated harping about masks strikes me as a lack of original thought at best and a coordinated smear campaign at face value. We get it: the WHO should've recommended masks full-throatedly. But your interpretation that a YouTube…

I doubt it will be, or least I hope not. But at some point they'll cross the line, they may have already done so and I just don't know about it.

I don't like censorship. It's dangerous. It's the tool of choice of authoritarians everywhere. Free speech, even of opinions we find distasteful or downright ugly, is still worth upholding.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#608

Post by foolinaround »

SkyMarshal wrote: post #424
foolinaround wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's lots and lots of bad stuff there... The question is should youtube be censoring it? if so, why this, and not others?

Videos like this not only spread false info, they do something more pernicious by distorting or distracting an already partially-numerate public from understanding growth rates and scale. Eg, the important thing about an outbreak is its second and third derivatives, rate of growth and rate of rate of growth. Here they claim SARS-NCOV-2 is "similar in prevalance and death rate" to flu, somehow missing the fact that th…

i am almost with you there, but i see youtube as a biased actor

also, when experts themselves (not these 2 guys) have come up with different recommendations - and cant agree with themselves, youtube should allow a free exchange of ideas.

they are free (and should) to add a notice that says that it is potentially false, etc.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#609

Post by skuthus »

autoexec wrote: post #551
snowwrestler wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When speech is being silenced (de-platformed) This is a ludicrous equivalency; by this standard YouTube is also “silencing (deplatforming)” people who don’t have computers because it’s not giving them resources to help them make and post videos. Deplatforming is not silencing. The default state of an individual in society is no platform. People who want platforms should build them. > Personally, I think that educat…

> by this standard YouTube is also “silencing (deplatforming)” people who don’t have computers because it’s not giving them resources to help them make and post videos. unlike directly removing videos from their platform youtube is not responsible for preventing people from having a computer. We should all however strive to make computers and internet access as accessible to people as possible. > Deplatforming is not…

>The default state is a very limited platform (those immediately around you at any given time perhaps), but when you explicitly provide a platform for the public to use and then censor voices because you don't like what they have to say you're violating free speech principles.

If the You I highlighted was the state, you would be correct. But it isnt.

Re: YouTube removed a viral video of two doctors calling for an end to quarantine

#610

Post by skuthus »

dependenttypes wrote: post #588
wvenable wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Free speech" is a right but also an ideal. The problem with the ideal is that most people have it wrong. "Free speech" is not speech without consequences. Nobody here thinks that speech should be criminalized but that doesn't mean you have the right to be heard. If nobody wants to associate with you because of your speech, that's their right. You are not entitled to a soapbox.

> "Free speech" is not speech without consequences This is literally what free speech is. "You can speak your mind or I will kill you" or "You can speak your mind but if I disagree with you I will make sure that nobody can hear you again (by de-platforming you)" is not very free speech-y. > but that doesn't mean you have the right to be heard You should certainly have the right to be heard by these that want to hear…

It's more like 'I have the right to choose which voices get heard on my private platform'
Post reply on HN