31–40 of 340 posts
It's simply irresponsible for so-called "independent journalists" to cover material that neither they nor their audiences are in a position to understand. We've seen what several decades of totally unregulated broadcasting have done, to the detriment of our society - without well-funded expert guidance, conspiracy theories and extremism run rampant. Platforms must be restricted to those who prove they can use them ap…
To Jordan Chariton exclaiming in all caps: > How are journalists supposed to chronicle history if YouTube — and others — are outlawing it? Regardless of what YouTube says, they are an advertiser-friendly entertainment website. Why in God's name would you use it to "chronicle history"?
> Why in God's name would you use it to "chronicle history"? Because for better or for worse these platforms have become the public square. They are where modern life happens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why in God's name would you use it to "chronicle history"? Because for better or for worse these platforms have become the public square. They are where modern life happens.
Clearly YouTube doesn’t want to be a public square.
Just 3 hours ago a group of teens live streamed themselves stabbing a 15 year old girl to death in Louisiana [1]. Like twitch swatting this is not a new phenomenon. Clearly something needs to be done to discourage or eliminate such content. [1]: https://www.fox13memphis.com/news/trending/4-teen-girls-char...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In a free market you can choose who your corporate “overlords” are. So; which are you for? Should the government prevent monopolies from having free speech? Because telling google or whoever what or what not they allow in their private platforms is anti free speech. 0r should the government simply prevent monopolies so you have the choice to go somewhere else to consume whatever frothing angry garbage you wish to con…
or Option C: we continue to complain so public opinion can change thus creating enough demand for alternatives and then we leave google to die. We get the law, no need to bring it up every chance you get. All these BigCorp white knights aren't doing the public any favors with your wet-blanketry.
Public opinion should change and we should have alternatives; but as long as google and amazon hold monopolies on internet infrastructure option C can’t happen.
We shouldn’t be mad at google policing their own content- we should be mad that theyre the one of the only games in town.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I for one, welcome our corporate overlords deciding what ideas are good for us and what ideas are bad for us. Thinking is difficult!
In a free market you can choose who your corporate “overlords” are. So; which are you for? Should the government prevent monopolies from having free speech? Because telling google or whoever what or what not they allow in their private platforms is anti free speech. 0r should the government simply prevent monopolies so you have the choice to go somewhere else to consume whatever frothing angry garbage you wish to con…
It's simply irresponsible for so-called "independent journalists" to cover material that neither they nor their audiences are in a position to understand. We've seen what several decades of totally unregulated broadcasting have done, to the detriment of our society - without well-funded expert guidance, conspiracy theories and extremism run rampant. Platforms must be restricted to those who prove they can use them ap…
And you are qualified to express this view how?
To Jordan Chariton exclaiming in all caps: > How are journalists supposed to chronicle history if YouTube — and others — are outlawing it? Regardless of what YouTube says, they are an advertiser-friendly entertainment website. Why in God's name would you use it to "chronicle history"?
if a tree falls down in a forest and nobody hears it, does it make a sound?
It's simply irresponsible for so-called "independent journalists" to cover material that neither they nor their audiences are in a position to understand. We've seen what several decades of totally unregulated broadcasting have done, to the detriment of our society - without well-funded expert guidance, conspiracy theories and extremism run rampant. Platforms must be restricted to those who prove they can use them ap…
And you are qualified to express this view how?