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

YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 1001 posts

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#211

Post by stopping »

zozbot234 wrote: post #117
e40 wrote: post #21

The lies are 100% of the reason the capital riot happened, so yes, they do need to stop. Fox News lies every single day. What do we expect from a population of people that only hear these lies, day in and day out? They're going to react just like they did on 1/6.

The underlying problem with this whole idea of banning "seditious lies/libel" is that it's not strategically consistent. If you ban people (especially political leaders!) from complaining that the election was stolen, what happens is that the next election will definitely be stolen, and no one will be able to do anything about it. Then that whole political side throws their support behind some military figure instead…

Even if corporations were to pre-emptively ban all speech that threatens to undermine the public faith in our elections, there is still a legal system which allows for complaints to be heard fairly. For all practical purposes, "How many people can you broadcast your message to" has effectively zero bearing on the strength of your legal case. Therefore, I don't see how banning seditious speech opens up an avenue for someone to actually steal an election.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#212

Post by dang »

lsh123 wrote: post #151
dang wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear you, but there are many ways of making the same point without breaking HN's rules, which call for avoiding flamebait, snark, name-calling and so on. For example, the way you've made your point here is well within the site guidelines. Also, please keep in mind that I didn't ban the GP account for that comment, but rather for a consistent pattern of breaking the rules and flouting our many requests to stop. HN's…

As I said, I don’t know the history of this account but this specific comment that got it banned doesn’t look bad to me. BTW, I would personally ban all politics from HN.

You do have to know something of the history of the account in order to really respond to our banning it. We wouldn't have banned it just for that one post, even though it obviously breaks the site guidelines by being flamebait and name-calling ('thoughtcrimes') and ideological battle.

Banning all politics from HN is not an option, for reasons I've explained many times. See the links here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25723581.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#213

Post by fphhotchips »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #196
tptacek wrote: post #181

I think we can't reasonably be doing front page stories every time one of these things gets reported. It's going to keep happening. Different people have different feelings about that, but we've had thousands of front-page-thread comments on much more important stories than Bannon's dumb podcast channel. At some point we should just refer back to those threads. I don't need to see Bannon's culpability litigated on HN…

Not all of us think these events are unimportant minutiae to be glossed over by rendering a sphere on a quad.

Does this gratify anyone's intellectual curiosity though? Ie. Is it on-topic for HN? I don't get to make that decision, but I do think the bar for US Politics Article #5046 should be higher than "rendering a square on a quad".

A good analysis article around _why_ technology companies are moving in one direction on moderation policy at once? Yes. Excellent.

As-it-happens news articles? Ehhh. Not as much. There are other places on the internet for that sort of thing.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#214

Post by newacct583 »

TheOperator wrote: post #195
tptacek wrote: post #181

I think we can't reasonably be doing front page stories every time one of these things gets reported. It's going to keep happening. Different people have different feelings about that, but we've had thousands of front-page-thread comments on much more important stories than Bannon's dumb podcast channel. At some point we should just refer back to those threads. I don't need to see Bannon's culpability litigated on HN…

The story has nothing to do with Steve Bannon's podcast channel and everything to do with the sea change in how social media moderation policy is being interpreted and enforced.

Which itself is clearly driven by the sea change in the climate of political violence in this country over the past four days. On which we've clearly spent the many thousands of comments mentioned in tpacek's upthread comment. Bannon got banned for being part of the same violent subculture that got Trump banned and Parler canceled. I don't know that there's more that can be said that wasn't already in the other topics.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#215

Post by o-__-o »

AaronFriel wrote: post #163
ecommerceguy wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue the reason these type of people are pissed off is because they have been incessantly attacked for 4 plus years while watching the media turn a blind eye to anything that disparages any minority or "protected class." We spent 10 MONTHS watching riots every day. DC was BURNING in July.

If you truly believe that DC was BURNING, then I think you have fallen prey to those lies.

If you truly think a mass of armed people stormed the capitol then you too have fallen prey to lies.

What I’m saying is both actions didn’t end with a good look and they both should be condemned

Edit: I seemed to have touched a nerve. I was rewatching video from people storming the capitol. They were not armed and they were all milling about without a plan. Even the lady that was shot was unarmed

Edit2: I think we are being hoodwinked. We saw lots of angry people storming the capitol out of frustration, provoked by false information fed to them. I don’t think the disinformation campaign stopped at the rally, I think it is continuing now. Everyone is being led to believe that the folks who walked in were acting the same as the Michigan capitol protest earlier last year. It was not like that. It was a bunch of people thinking they were going to make a difference and ended up not having a clue of what they were going to do. The orderly exit of most leaving the capitol building is proof of this.

I just ask before you rage downvote to pause and think is this the division they (those making the narrative of DC burning vs Capitol Siege) are trying to sow? Both actions are heinous and doesn’t look good for America regardless of how you try to spin it.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#216

Post by longtimegoogler »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #84
tpmx wrote: post #2

I'm not even in the US, but all of this banning makes me really curious about what's being banned and why. Something that some of you may have missed: This banning thing already moved into the infrastructure/cloud services layer (AWS): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25707959

What I’m interested in is how many people here are applauding the banning while liberal voices like Glenn Greenwald, and the ALCU are decrying it. I’m sure some of my conservative friends would laugh if I told them this site makes me look like Regean in comparison to some others. All good fun of course. I believe that everyone is entitled to their opinion and ones I disagree with shouldn’t be hidden, but that itself…

Even if those opinions call for murdering journalists? Like many countries in Europe, calls for violence should be illegal. It's also pretty easy to not care about these things if your are a white conservative male and not the target of these things.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#217

Post by maroonblazer »

zdragnar wrote: post #187
dieortin wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say it like “getting caught in the moment” and assaulting the Capitol is something completely reasonable that anyone in that situation might do.

Too many people are trying to rationalize the polarization of our society, focusing exclusively on the ends and ignoring the means. Remember NPR's puff piece justifying looting? Or (I think) CNN's reporter standing in front of a burning building while saying that the BLM protests were mostly peaceful? (They were, but the not-peaceful bits were downplayed in an obviously biased way). There was another interview I saw…

False equivalence. Looting commercial districts (while objectionable) is not the same as falsely claiming a federal election was stolen and looting the Capital.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#219

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

TheOperator wrote: post #195
tptacek wrote: post #181

I think we can't reasonably be doing front page stories every time one of these things gets reported. It's going to keep happening. Different people have different feelings about that, but we've had thousands of front-page-thread comments on much more important stories than Bannon's dumb podcast channel. At some point we should just refer back to those threads. I don't need to see Bannon's culpability litigated on HN…

The story has nothing to do with Steve Bannon's podcast channel and everything to do with the sea change in how social media moderation policy is being interpreted and enforced.

But is it helpful for that discussion to repeatedly restart it for every social media platform in the sea? The specific details of the source article here don't seem to have added any new information; 100% of the comments I see would have fit equally well on "Stripe bans Trump campaign" or "Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler" or any of the other threads we've had over the past few days.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#220

Post by o-__-o »

joverholt wrote: post #209
vehemenz wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Preposterous. CNN is not as biased as Fox News. Where does this narrative come from? After 9/11, I don't remember CNN becoming the propaganda machine for a political party courting religious zealots and xenophobic "patriots" while sliding into its own editorial extremism. Even if CNN were as biased as Fox News, the problems would not end there. Fox News peddles misinformation, disinformation, white nationalism, resen…

Do you watch CNN? For about 2 years they had cnn playing on a tv near the break room, so as I refilled my water bottle, I got to see what cnn thought was the most important (Trump) news. They spent a week on how much diet soda he drank. They had experts on saying why it could cause mental problems and that they should use the 25th on him. They spent several days when he had 2 scoops of ice cream at a White House dinn…

I too remember the uproar of Obama wearing a tan suit. Or his mustard on a burger faux pas. And the weeklong intervention into the lack of an American flag on his lapel.

This is why I say both sides hide skeletons in their closet.

Post reply on HN