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

521–530 of 1001 posts

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#521

Post by pmiller2 »

j8hn wrote: post #512
pmiller2 wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They got in because police reaction to this protest was far different from police reaction to BLM protests in DC: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/01/07/metro/photos-how-law-... I assume you have noticed how the majority of the people in the 1/6 "protests" were white, didn't you?

Could it be that this particular group at the Capitol didn't have any supposed proclivity to violence? This was supposed to be a group of people who "backed the blue" and stood for law and order. Perhaps their guard was let down because of this? Perhaps it was because the police response to mass gatherings has changed and become more lenient since the beginning of the BLM protests. Interesting that you posted this li…

So, you're telling me the response had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that almost all the 1/6 "protestors" were white, that that was just a coincidence? You're gonna have to provide more than "could it be," and "perhaps," if you want me to swallow that line.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#522

Post by creato »

erik_seaberg wrote: post #509
creato wrote: post #482

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I pretty much agree with everything you wrote. The part that scares me is this: > It's a mistake for the Democrats to obsess over blaming and castigating those people, instead of focusing on convincing them, swaying them, educating them, peeling away voters and ultimately delivering real life improvements (the big part of that) if they truly believe they have a better path to offer for their future. What if there sim…

Foreign competition is a choice (by setting low tariffs). I happen to benefit from it, but it seems a lot of working citizens don’t, and they want more protectionism than they got from Trump.

I'm not one of the economists that knee jerk reject protectionism, but I don't think it would help that much either. Trading partners won't accept tariffs without reciprocating. The US might be big enough now to get away with this to some degree, but that won't last forever, and tariffs would probably accelerate that reduction in influence.

I'm all for tariffs when there is some other goal that makes sense (for example I think tariffs should bake in the cost of environmental or other regulatory compliance we have that the foreign trading partner does not).

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#523

Post by perl4ever »

weare138 wrote: post #383
TheOperator wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Protesting electoral fraud is also absolutely required, even if I am extremely extremely sceptical that it actually happened. Some of the protests that happened in the civil rights movement were indeed violent although this has been rather aggressively whitewashed in government approved public school classes meant to teach students the way to affect real change is to stand around with signs and sing songs and have ra…

>Protesting electoral fraud is also absolutely required, even if I am extremely extremely sceptical that it actually happened. But you can't compare people committing act of violence to perpatuate a lie at the greater expense of society to people protesting for civil rights. And no the people that stormed the Capitol building, which hasn't happened since the war of 1812 and was committed by a hostile foreign nation,…

>Sedition is not a right

I've been seeing lots of people write things like this very recently. But honestly, when did you start using the word "sedition" and when did the word acquire emotional weight to you, as a dastardly crime? When and how do you think other people got familiar with the word?

If I'm being honest, my association with the word sedition before pretty recently was almost entirely a very dim memory of the Alien and Sedition Acts being mentioned in grade school. And an even dimmer memory that they were unpopular and probably unconstitutional.

It's not that I think it's necessarily wrong to use it, I just feel suddenly surrounded by people who are pretending that we all are used to using it and viscerally being outraged by people who commit it. Which feels weird since I can't remember seeing it in normal conversation in like 30+ years.

Maybe it sounds better than treason, perhaps because treason is a word right wing types like to use?

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#524

Post by [deleted] »

csa wrote: post #18
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

[Note: Trying to present this as factually as possible.] According to what the companies say: - The President incited some people last week to engage in violent behavior at and towards Congress. - There is evidence that further violence is being planned via a variety of platforms. - The platforms are attempting to limit their exposure to facilitating such actions. Some people think that the companies have ulterior mo…

[deleted]

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#525

Post by jacquesm »

o-__-o wrote: post #495
jacquesm wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And killed a police officer. By beating him to death. With American flags and a fire extinguisher. They were still beating him long after he was down.

Yup, and DC was also on fire, nearly burned down by reckless protesters in May! Maybe we should have a larger police presence in our nations capitol to prevent all these insurrections?

A bunch of people just invaded your seat of government, killed an officer, quite possibly had much worse plans than what they actually did which only barely got avoided because the elected representatives got to safety and a suicide bomber just blew up half an office block and you are going on about bonfires in this thread as though there is some kind of equivalency. And all that before we're getting into why they did all that: a pack of lies versus many many decades of actual oppression. Stop already and re-calibrate your sense of what is normal and what isn't, because if you don't you are at risk of becoming part of the problem.

This thread is about the youtube channel of one of the instigators of this insane action against your elected officials being banned. The BLM riots - which certainly had bad aspects - are off-topic and any attempt to drag them in here is simply whataboutism.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#526

Post by Pfhreak »

shripadk wrote: post #517
amanaplanacanal wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would think so, but I believe the owner of Parler has already stated that he can’t find anybody willing to host him.

I haven't seen the CEO of Parler release any such statement. ---- Rate limited so editing my reply for comment below Thanks for the link. I couldn't find it. If this is the situation then it's extremely bad. The entire situation is fucked up. We literally are in a Censorship era. But the silver lining is that now there will be serious efforts into creating a decentralised internet that isn't controlled by any Big Tec…

https://deadline.com/2021/01/parler-ceo-says-service-dropped...

> “We’re going to try our best to get back online as quickly as possible. But we’re having a lot of trouble because every vendor we talk to says they won’t work with us. Because if Apple doesn’t approve and Google doesn’t approve, they won’t.”

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#527

Post by pmiller2 »

camhart wrote: post #297
Talanes wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "Left" side of that chart is generously "Center" and less generously "Leans Right."

Bias measurements are relative to something. It could make sense for you to feel that way, because you and your social circles may generally be more left leaning. What is the definition of "center"? They describe how they come to a bias rating at https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-rating-method... .

If you think that CNN is as far left as OAN and The Daily Caller are to the right, I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona to sell you.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#528

Post by cmurf »

derwiki wrote: post #71
kumarvvr wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One would argue that reasonable people be reasonable. Of course, 1% of trump voters may be giving the 99% a bad name.

Latest numbers I’ve seen are 18% https://thehill.com/homenews/news/533452-poll-18-percent-of-...

Day of poll. 45% of Republicans approve of the storming of the Capitol building https://today.yougov.com/topics/politics/articles-reports/20...

More data needed, but it could be an example of folks not realizing how hot the potato was in the first poll. And dropped it by the second poll.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#529

Post by j8hn »

pmiller2 wrote: post #521
j8hn wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could it be that this particular group at the Capitol didn't have any supposed proclivity to violence? This was supposed to be a group of people who "backed the blue" and stood for law and order. Perhaps their guard was let down because of this? Perhaps it was because the police response to mass gatherings has changed and become more lenient since the beginning of the BLM protests. Interesting that you posted this li…

So, you're telling me the response had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that almost all the 1/6 "protestors" were white, that that was just a coincidence ? You're gonna have to provide more than "could it be," and "perhaps," if you want me to swallow that line.

I was just giving you plausible explanations. But sure it's always easy to say "X" got away with this because of white privilege.

I don't think that Mayor Bowser refused to get additional law enforcment because of white privilege.

Re: YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel

#530

Post by lostlogin »

runawaybottle wrote: post #500
FFRefresh wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's your proposal for how Fox News should be handled, given they "lie every single day"? Should Fox News have their licenses removed, and be taken off the air & internet?

Just so everyone knows, this is the type of stuff that aired of Foxnews days before the riot: https://youtu.be/oV97eEFJ4xI A rallying call like that simply doesn’t work on Democrats, but god does it work on Republicans. I just don’t see any of this dying down at all, and the Republicans are always prepared to tap into this demo around election time (in two years time at the mid terms). They live for this. Banning the…

Can someone explain why this is downvoted?
Post reply on HN