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

YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

unherd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 596 posts

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#241

Post by root_axis »

hartator wrote: post #166
root_axis wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don’t want youtube to be in charge of deciding what is credible or not This point is often repeated during discussions on these topics but I believe this is an inaccurate characterization. YouTube is not "in charge of deciding what is credible" in the fashion that kind of phrasing suggests; they are moderating the content on their platform with respect to their business process and company values, those decisions…

> they are moderating the content on their platform with respect to their business process and company values, those decisions are not a reflection of credibility. There is a difference between morality and legality. It might be legal for ATT to cut your Internet because they don't like you but it will be immoral for sure.

Having your video removed from someone's website isn't the same thing as having your internet cut off.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#242

Post by joeclark77 »

drunkpotato wrote: post #182
ksk wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An advertising company deciding what is credible or not is scary.

But YouTube is not deciding on the credibility of the video. They are simply saying that in this emergency, in the interests of public safety, they will not allow videos that contradict World Health Organization information and policy guidelines. And they removed a video that violated that policy. It's a very narrowly defined exception to their normally open platform. I don't see what is scary or sinister about that.

How does it make it better that they've arbitrarily decided to censor videos that contradict China's volunteer propaganda agency?

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#243

Post by root_axis »

theandrewbailey wrote: post #240
root_axis wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

YouTube is not the ministry of truth, it is a popular entertainment website that people visit voluntarily. People very incorrectly treating YouTube like it's some kind of authoritative source of knowledge is the problem, not YouTube.

Youtube is treating Youtube like an authoritative source of knowledge.

Marketing is not reality, this should be pretty obvious on HN.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#244

Post by abfan1127 »

_bxg1 wrote: post #239
xhkkffbf wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me be contrary: who shut down millions of businesses and put millions out of work? It wasn't QAnon. It was the state -- and it looks like YouTube is aligned with the pro-shutdown folks who don't want their wisdom questioned. Now I'm a big believer in keeping things shut. I thing prudence is super-important. But QAnon's actions are mainly talk. The state's, however, are different.

> QAnon's actions are mainly talk QAnon is an FBI-registered domestic terror organization: https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/qanon-... They've been connected to multiple attempted acts of violence. They aren't just talk.

FBI has been connected to multiple successful acts of violence.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#245

Post by im3w1l »

majormajor wrote: post #217
_vertigo wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they are moderating the content on their platform with respect to their business process and company values, those decisions are not a reflection of credibility. YouTube is a corporate product This is such a tired argument. YouTube is ubiquitous - it is the primary (read: effectively only) platform for video hosting, which today comprises a large proportion of all information transfer between humans. Companies like…

There are a million options for video hosting. You are performing some sleight of hand here - claiming they are the only way to share your view - when what you are really referring to is that they have the most viewers, and that they have tools for promoting content in front of that audience. "I deserve access to an audience on their system" is a very weak claim compared to the (untrue) "they are the only place I can…

More and more social interaction becomes intermediated. And especially during this time of quarantine. It's not as easy as convincing people. Because people are now all on ban-happy platforms. And these platforms synchronize their bans.

Let's say your video has some modicum of success on no-name-host.com. Suddenly facebook, youtube, reddit, discord all ban links to that host to reduce spread. They do this intentionally. They brag about it to politicians. They get rewarded for acting as a block... by the state.

It's a nice little proxy arrangement.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#246

Post by nojito »

gnusty_gnurc wrote: post #96
nojito wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s not qualified to speak about infectious disease. Infectious disease is a distinct specialty in medicine.

Are you qualified to decide whether someone with medical expertise can discuss medicine, health and policy?

Yes because doctors are licensed by their specialty. Which is only achieved by years of direct subject matter training...coupled with continuous education.

The doctor in question is not licensed for infectious disease.

You should never trust a doctor speaking outside of his expertise.

However most of the celebrity doctors do that every single day which is an insult to the entire medical profession.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#247

Post by chvid »

acituan wrote: post #51

I don’t agree with the interview contents, nor think professorship alone gives sufficient credibility in the face of a novel pandemic, data of which is in the process of emerging. That said, I don’t want youtube to be in charge of deciding what is credible or not. They don’t have in-house experts on these domains, they don’t have a magic epistemology machine that spits out the “facts”. They are good at writing web se…

I have been following unherd for a bit and while they are on the let's do as the Swedes side of things, this is wellreasoned long form interviews with established experts and opinion makers.

I don't understand mechanism on why something like this gets censored. I think it is obvious that this sort of "overcensoring" will come back on youtube in a negative way; and possibly even hurt the case for lockdowns and careful reopening.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#248

Post by cfmcdonald »

xhkkffbf wrote: post #215
_bxg1 wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And on the other end of the spectrum we have people being indoctrinated into violent conspiracy groups like QAnon, or being prompted to set fire to cell towers, or bringing measles back from the dead, because of YouTube videos. There's a line to be drawn here - and it's a tricky line, to be sure - but "YouTube should be totally neutral and not pull anything" is not a viable answer.

Let me be contrary: who shut down millions of businesses and put millions out of work? It wasn't QAnon. It was the state -- and it looks like YouTube is aligned with the pro-shutdown folks who don't want their wisdom questioned. Now I'm a big believer in keeping things shut. I thing prudence is super-important. But QAnon's actions are mainly talk. The state's, however, are different.

Actually it was mostly the populace who shut down business activity of their own accord, at least in the U.S. See https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/07/upshot/pandemic-economy-g...

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#249

Post by [deleted] »

MattGaiser wrote: post #148
xhkkffbf wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if he's a raving insane person, he should be left online. Indeed, they probably don't censor the people who are truly insane because that's obvious to any viewer. They only censor the people who say things they don't like.

> Indeed, they probably don't censor the people who are truly insane because that's obvious to any viewer. They only censor the people who say things they don't like. Alex Jones?

[deleted]

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#250

Post by stale2002 »

scarface74 wrote: post #35
ppod wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think that such people should be banned from content distribution channels?

Yes. You have the right to say whatever you want but you don’t have the right to force someone else to publish it. If you want to publish what you want free of interference, pay for your own servers and bandwidth.

> don’t have the right to force someone else to publish it

That wasn't the question. The question was should they be banned?

I'd say no.

Post reply on HN