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

YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 933 posts

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#211

Post by cheph »

owlbynight wrote: post #174

I'll preface this by stating that I hate the idea of censorship and I always have. However, were I to happen across someone motionless on the floor with a needle in their arm, I would give them NARCAN instead of a ride to a rehab center. I'm from the United States. Social media is currently poisoning our country to a degree that I think it may be too late to try and draw out the fight for free speech by using free sp…

> I agree that what YouTube is doing here is a slippery slope and it's scary. However, I personally think that this is now a war for democracy, and things are going to need to be sacrificed.

YouTube choosing what you can see is as far from democracy as it can get. Not sure how you get from that to saving "democracy".

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#212

Post by hnlmorg »

owlbynight wrote: post #174

I'll preface this by stating that I hate the idea of censorship and I always have. However, were I to happen across someone motionless on the floor with a needle in their arm, I would give them NARCAN instead of a ride to a rehab center. I'm from the United States. Social media is currently poisoning our country to a degree that I think it may be too late to try and draw out the fight for free speech by using free sp…

Free speech isn't about all voices being equal though, it is about the freedom to speak out against the government. It's an important distinction because the latter is needed for democracy to work where as a former doesn't work in practice because some voices should carry more weight (like subject matter experts).

Ironically the former seems more prevalent than ever with every nutjob on social media voicing their opinions, while Trump has been systematically eroding the latter with his "fake news" campaigns and reporter biases.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#214

Post by gitrog »

nickff wrote: post #199
spuz wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be interested to know what your thoughts are on the UK and German models of "free speech" where no one has an absolute right to say what they want - certain subjects such as Holocaust denial or promotion of terrorism are banned. You could argue that we have been on a slippery slope for a long time but you could equally argue the slippery slope is a fallacy. I think it's important to think about what the actual pu…

>"The right to free speech is simply a shortcut to a more fundamental right to allow people to live freely without undue influence from others." You are asserting a series of very controversial points here: 1) Some rights are more important than others. 2) Positive rights can override negative rights. 3) 'Living freely without undue influence from others' is more important than 'the right to free speech'. Which philo…

> 1) Some rights are more important than others.

If you've been found not guilty of a crime in the US and admit to it afterward, you cannot be prosecuted again by protection of Double Jeopardy, correct?

Is that not the same thing as saying some rights are more important than others?

And is (2) and (3) not just variations on (1)?

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#215

Post by spuz »

nickff wrote: post #199
spuz wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be interested to know what your thoughts are on the UK and German models of "free speech" where no one has an absolute right to say what they want - certain subjects such as Holocaust denial or promotion of terrorism are banned. You could argue that we have been on a slippery slope for a long time but you could equally argue the slippery slope is a fallacy. I think it's important to think about what the actual pu…

>"The right to free speech is simply a shortcut to a more fundamental right to allow people to live freely without undue influence from others." You are asserting a series of very controversial points here: 1) Some rights are more important than others. 2) Positive rights can override negative rights. 3) 'Living freely without undue influence from others' is more important than 'the right to free speech'. Which philo…

Sorry maybe I didn't express it correctly but my thoughts were that nobody believes the right to make sounds from our lungs or put words on a page are fundamental - what is more important to us is that our views and opinions are heard by others and that no authority can choose for us what we hear. Living in this way gives us more freedom to choose how we live and allows us to decide who to be influenced by.

Now take the example of promotion of terrorism - it's possible to argue that by allowing someone to post certain types of messages to a group on Facebook, they are creating an undue influence on the people in that group. For example by asking his followers to reject the views of outsiders (a common tactic in many religions, cults and conspiracy groups) a terrorist could be argued to have taken the freedom to hear other viewpoints away from his followers.

Now you can of course say that any terrorist or religious or cult leader is acting within a system of free speech - no one has technically had their freedom taken from them. That is true, but the reality of how humans choose who and what they listen to create the same effect as if they had lost those faculties.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#216

Post by serial_dev »

pzmTWLwfwJ wrote: post #126
ajsnigrutin wrote: post #115

Yay, this is great, and should be used for everything! /s If we used this for medical advice in my country, this would make it very funny... at the start of the epidemic, our government "experts" said: - "healthy people don't need masks" ...and youtube would censor all the "fearmongering paranoics" advocating for mask use. Then on some random spring day, our government makes a new rule: - "you need a mask and gloves…

Isn't this how science works, you have new information and you use it to make a better decision.

The issue is not that they got it wrong the first time(or lied on purpose to defend the economy, or to prevent panic and hoarding).

The issue is that people were marked as conspiracy theorist nutjobs for holding some views that were the official recommendation a week ago (or became the recommendation a week later). If officials can get it wrong, why would you censor your "drunk uncle" from getting it wrong?

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#217

Post by gitrog »

roenxi wrote: post #192
pzmTWLwfwJ wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't this how science works, you have new information and you use it to make a better decision.

Banning everyone who disagrees with the current state of the science is also not how science works; and yet YouTube is going to attempt (and fail) to do just that. YouTube is almost certainly going to be banning literal doctors with actual PHDs from expressing scientific opinions which later turn out to be substantiated. The article says this ban includes material that "explicitly disputes health authorities’ guidanc…

> YouTube is almost certainly going to be banning literal doctors with actual PHDs from expressing scientific opinions which later turn out to be substantiated.

To be fair, Youtube shouldn't be the platform where doctors express their scientific opinion or try to win over support.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#218

Post by crististm »

owlbynight wrote: post #174

I'll preface this by stating that I hate the idea of censorship and I always have. However, were I to happen across someone motionless on the floor with a needle in their arm, I would give them NARCAN instead of a ride to a rehab center. I'm from the United States. Social media is currently poisoning our country to a degree that I think it may be too late to try and draw out the fight for free speech by using free sp…

The point is that youtube is not an absolute authority and truth reference. So when they decide what is misinformation they position themselves above public scrutiny.

It's not that the masses are dumb or smart. The few deciders from Youtube are not truth dispensers that we should all trust above all else.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#219

Post by rightbyte »

belorn wrote: post #154
0xy wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dr Fauci publicly claimed masks were not effective as a means of protecting the supply of masks to healthcare workers, he knew his claims were false at the time he made them. So no, it wasn't "science", it was deliberately misleading public statements.

From the Swedish public health agency: "We do not currently recommend face masks in public settings since the scientific evidence around the effectiveness of face masks in combatting the spread of infection is unclear. However, there may be situations where face masks can be useful despite the uncertain state of knowledge about the effects. Face masks must always be seen as complementary to other recommendations: sta…

It is a nice touch of doublethink for Youtube to be able to ban different mutually exclusive "misinformation" depending on region.

Re: YouTube bans coronavirus vaccine misinformation

#220

Post by jjgreen »

DanBC wrote: post #208
nso95 wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They lied because they didn't want medical professionals to run out of masks

Can you link to the studies that you think existed in March / April 2020 that showed that masks worked?

Or since?
Post reply on HN