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

YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

newsweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 923 posts

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#51

Post by bcoates »

stolen_biscuit wrote: post #27
Zenst wrote: post #18

Yay another extremist swept under the digital carpet, problem solved - well NO. This will just shift this extremist content to other unregulated and unmonitored platforms that will not engage in debate, but blindly accept such things. After all, if people believe this kinda stuff, cutting of the head won't stop them believing, just shifts the problem out of the public glare, at least on the surface.

Actually it's been pretty conclusively shown that removing extremist content from mainstream channels pretty much prevents the ideas from propagating in the mainstream. If the cockroaches want to crawl under the fridge there's not much you can do to stop them but you can stop them from breeding on the table.

As everyone knows, nobody propagated strange conspiracy theories before the invention of YouTube and Twitter.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#52

Post by brenden2 »

rajup wrote: post #37
brenden2 wrote: post #11

IMO censorship is wrong. To quote someone smarter than me: > I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2015/06/01/defend-say/

It's not censorship by any means; YouTube isn't the government. David Icke and his ilk should feel free to take their lunatic fringe theories to the lunatic fringe corners of the Internet like Breitbart etc. They won't be "censored" there.

YouTube is a de facto public utility at this point. IMO if they want it to be a closed ecosystem, they should not allow public access the way they currently do. There's no good alternative to YouTube (yet) but I hope there is some day.

Pushing people to the fringes just breeds more hatred, outrage, misinformation, and extremists.

Imagine if there was just one phone company and they only let people who they agree with have phones.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#53

Post by ctrl-j »

sunseb wrote: post #8

I despise David Icke but I think platforms like YouTube or Facebook should remain neutral. It's not their job to tell us what people should be looking at or not. Then what? We end up like China where we can only browse government propaganda?

I don't believe slippery slope applies in this situation. For the most part Youtube has been fairly lenient as to which accounts get heavily moderated and/or removed. I may revise my opinion if it is ever shown that they become more aggressively restrictive to what is hosted on their platform - but for the most part you seem to be given a wide berth to upload what you wish.

The worst I've seen so far is that their video promotion algorithm can be used to "shadow ban".. but I personally believe they have every right to decide how their internal advertisements work.

There is also still the free and open internet as a general platform. Torrents and direct downloads are available as a distribution method if there is truly no other platform willing to host your media.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#54

Post by brailsafe »

Barrin92 wrote: post #28
Zenst wrote: post #18

Yay another extremist swept under the digital carpet, problem solved - well NO. This will just shift this extremist content to other unregulated and unmonitored platforms that will not engage in debate, but blindly accept such things. After all, if people believe this kinda stuff, cutting of the head won't stop them believing, just shifts the problem out of the public glare, at least on the surface.

>Yay another extremist swept under the digital carpet, problem solved - well NO. Well yes, at least partially. Studies of bans on hate communities on reddit have shown effectiveness not only in reducing the total hate, but also, and this is important, changing the behaviour of individual users who were active in the hate communities as they moved towards more moderate, diverse communities. [...] "What they found was…

is racism equivalent to fat shaming now?

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#55

Post by barrkel »

dvt wrote: post #36
stolen_biscuit wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually it's been pretty conclusively shown that removing extremist content from mainstream channels pretty much prevents the ideas from propagating in the mainstream. If the cockroaches want to crawl under the fridge there's not much you can do to stop them but you can stop them from breeding on the table.

> Actually it's been pretty conclusively shown that removing extremist content from mainstream channels pretty much prevents the ideas from propagating in the mainstream. Actually, no it hasn't. And for anyone that holds such a viewpoint, I'd strongly suggest reading J. S. Mill's classic, On Liberty [1] -- a foundational document of Western political thought. [1] https://www.gutenberg.org/files/34901/34901-h/34901-h.…

What's Mill's position on filter bubbles?

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#56

Post by barrkel »

bcoates wrote: post #51
stolen_biscuit wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually it's been pretty conclusively shown that removing extremist content from mainstream channels pretty much prevents the ideas from propagating in the mainstream. If the cockroaches want to crawl under the fridge there's not much you can do to stop them but you can stop them from breeding on the table.

As everyone knows, nobody propagated strange conspiracy theories before the invention of YouTube and Twitter.

They attempted, but they generally didn't have multi-billion-dollar corporations helping them spread their message.

And that's ok. They don't need that today either.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#57

Post by detaro »

chii wrote: post #45
imode wrote: post #30

I see a lot of people not wanting to offer alternative solutions to the treatment of this particular individual's content: if you're not in favor of removal, then what? This content can't be allowed to stand as-is. I'm sure you'd complain about any measure other than leaving this individual alone. If so, you deserve to be angry, because you're part of the overall problem. Edit: To remind all of you, downvotes should…

> if you're not in favor of removal, then what? This content can't be allowed to stand as-is. have youtube put on a warning saying that this content is misinformation/wrong. But not censored because censoring "wrong" content just gives those who blindly believe it to feel that they're being targeted - it doesn't change their mind. Censoring it is just promoting it to other underground channels that are more difficult…

> censoring "wrong" content just gives those who blindly believe it to feel that they're being targeted - it doesn't change their mind.

And having warnings slapped on it doesn't?

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#58

Post by luckydata »

brenden2 wrote: post #32
luckydata wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

that person didn't realize the damage propaganda could do with modern tools. Unfortunate reality is our cognitive biases can be exploited, and complete freedom of speech is not in the best interest of the majority of humanity. This is a "loophole" that is exploited over and over again by climate change denialists, cigarette companies, nazis...

Yeah, and just imagine what politicians could get away with if they had laws that allowed them to prevent people from speaking their mind.

This absolutism is unnecessary. Plenty of modern democratic countries have limits on acceptable speech (France, Sweden to give you a couple examples) and they are not less democratic than the US (I would argue they are more).

Limiting speech within agreed boundaries is not problematic as long as it's a decision taken with a good criteria and with a good goal in mind. It's no different than any other decision we make on how we setup society.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#59

Post by lovehashbrowns »

Zenst wrote: post #18

Yay another extremist swept under the digital carpet, problem solved - well NO. This will just shift this extremist content to other unregulated and unmonitored platforms that will not engage in debate, but blindly accept such things. After all, if people believe this kinda stuff, cutting of the head won't stop them believing, just shifts the problem out of the public glare, at least on the surface.

Problem solved! Yay another person that thinks if something doesn't fix the issue 100% then it can't be considered.

This is taking away their access to a platform that has global reach. They already had platforms where they didn't engage in debate, btw; they're called youtube channels with heavily-moderated chat sections. Except there they can reach millions of people.

Re: YouTube has deleted the account of David Icke

#60

Post by xf1cf »

DonHopkins wrote: post #25
xf1cf wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whether or not you agree with him is one thing. Youtube, Facebook, and other companies are treading a very thin line around Provider vs Publisher. Sure, most people might think that Icke doesn't make much sense, but how long until something _you_ like is censored off the platform? If you truly do believe in a table for rational discussion all ideas should be considered regardless of how far-out they may seen. By bann…

If something _you_ like is censored for the same reason David Icke was censored, then you can get the fuck off YouTube and Facebook yourself, and throw your little right wing victimhood hissy fit as the door hits you on the way out, just like Milo Yiannopoulos did, then subscribe to his mailing list or read his blog or buy his book. YouTube and Facebook aren't obligated to tolerate him spreading his filth on their se…

A service used by literally billions of people is a propaganda machine for those that control it. It is not a private platform anymore. Youtube can influence public opinion in one way or another by simply manipulating their ranking algorithm. I know it's probably hard to choke down, but YouTube can swing elections and change policy with a click of a button. There are significant regulations on television. We can apply these same regulations to YouTube.

It would be extremely naive to not believe that YouTube not only knows they have this level of control, but are actively seeking to exploit it. Assuming they are a rational actor this is precisely what they would be doing.

EDIT:

What I am saying is simply this: if their aim is to remove controversial characters then remove all of them. If they selectively ban controversial characters that identify with only one side of the horseshoe, then they are manipulating public opinion.

Post reply on HN