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

YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 645 posts

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#291

Post by caseysoftware »

Latty wrote: post #267
_yoqn wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since when is Project Veritas "right-wing"? The guy legally documents people saying things and releases that info to the public.

They are financed by the right wing, and continuously release heavily edited and out of context versions of recordings to push a right-wing narrative. They have paid settlements and plead guilty for causing harm through their sting attempts and disinformation multiple times. Anyone taking Veritas seriously is not looking at their history, which makes it very clear that anything they release is untrustworthy at best.…

> They have paid settlements and plead guilty for causing harm through their sting attempts and disinformation multiple times.

I saw that they pled guilty to trespassing but have otherwise won all their completed defamation cases.

Do you have a source/list of which cases they pled guilty to "misinformation" or similar?

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#292

Post by what_is_orcas »

ipaddr wrote: post #249
andrepd wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Can you link me to said CNN coverage where they twisting his words? Anyways this is a classic ruling class tactic: keep the plebs entertained with something else. While they're busy endlessly discussing the Rittenhouse case with ever more inane partisan takes, they're not discussing the impending economic crisis, the unprecedented levels of income and wealth inequality, pressing climate crisis...

All of those are media created issues as well.

You're asking me to believe that the income/wealth gap and climate change are media-created?

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#293

Post by gnarbarian »

waych wrote: post #283
etchalon wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering the streams are back up, this seems more like a failure of automation and reporting tools than a grand conspiracy.

Is this the same failure in automation that is keeping Rittenhouse from being searched on Facebook?

yes just like the automation failure that removed his GoFundMe legal defense campaigns.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#294

Post by gnarbarian »

hintymad wrote: post #107
thepasswordis wrote: post #11

I think at this point we can just expect this stuff. The ridiculousness of it, though. The rekieta law stream (which is fantastic , btw: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7YXd2M5E-8 ) has anywhere from 4-12 active lawyers giving commentary and context to everything that is happening. This is exactly the type of thing we dreamed about when we were first creating the internet. However: often times these smaller independ…

I wonder how lying for the so-called narratives could possibly benefit these media in the long run? They don't learn history? A country that does not care about facts will eventually hurt everyone, including those righteous journalists.

people forget very quickly. it's extremely depressing.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#295

Post by potato7890 »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #119
caeril wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> these smaller independent journalists and commenters go against the reality that media companies want you to believe you live in. For an example from this specific case, compare the actual unedited testimony of Gaige Grosskreutz, who admitted on the stand that Rittenhouse did not fire until Gaige's Glock 17 was pointed directly at Kyle's head , to the coverage of his testimony by CNN, et. al. The mainstream media l…

> Gaige Grosskreutz, who admitted on the stand that Rittenhouse did not fire until Gaige's Glock 17 was pointed directly at Kyle's head I've more or less read that fact on NYT though. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/08/us/kyle-rittenhouse-gaige... > “So when you were standing three to five feet from him with your arms up in the air, he never fired, right?” Corey Chirafisi, a defense lawyer, asked. > “Correct,” Mr. Gr…

Would be interesting to see the percentage people who only saw the first headline: https://archive.vn/https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/202...

“Gaige Grosskreutz says he feared for his life before Kyle Rittenhouse shot him during Kenosha unrest”

“Gaige Grosskreutz says he feared for his life, pointed gun at Kyle Rittenhouse before getting shot”

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#296

Post by redundantly »

csee wrote: post #239
tadbit wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation, please. First I'm hearing about this.

Jen Psaki said in a press conference that the executive branch is working with Facebook to take down posts containing "COVID misinformation".

Quite the leap being taken there.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#297

Post by Dma54rhs »

germinalphrase wrote: post #214
superflit2 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well he did the Kenosha Hat trick Shot a wifebeater, a pedo, and a burglar. To not make it inflammatory I will use this reference [1] "For example, yes, at age 19, Rosenbaum was sentenced to prison for sexually abusing five children — all boys between the ages of 9 and 11 — in Arizona’s Pima County in early 2002, according to his case file obtained via a public records request by Snopes." "Huber, who was 18 years old…

This comment is disrespectful of the dead and should be removed.

These are the past crimes they've been sentenced guilty already at court not some rumor or events they never got punished for. Calling a pedophile a pedophile is not disrespectful.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#298

Post by ryantgtg »

belltaco wrote: post #191
HideousKojima wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We have a justice system if there are crimes like that. And robust self-defense laws for when someone poses an immediate threat and there's not enough time to go to law enforcement to help. >The GP said they were laughing and celebrating it, that's quite different from 'aren't feeling much sympathy for someone dying'. It's called "understatement." To be clear, the death of such a person, especially if it is while th…

Isn't it illegal for 17 year olds to carry assault rifles and point them at others (prior to the incident where life wasn't threatened) as admitted in court. > To be clear, the death of such a person, especially if it is while they are in the process of trying to assault and/or kill someone (which the evidence clearly shows) is in fact something to be celebrated. The world is a better place for his absence from it. I…

I suggest not ever using the phrase “assault rifle” because you’ll just get responses where people say “it’s not an assault rifle” and they’ll think they actually won an argument.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#299

Post by ryantgtg »

0des wrote: post #210
belltaco wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it illegal for 17 year olds to carry assault rifles and point them at others (prior to the incident where life wasn't threatened) as admitted in court. > To be clear, the death of such a person, especially if it is while they are in the process of trying to assault and/or kill someone (which the evidence clearly shows) is in fact something to be celebrated. The world is a better place for his absence from it. I…

What is an assault rifle?

It’s a really big rifle. Next question.

Re: YouTube takes down independent court livestreams

#300

Post by handmodel »

akudha wrote: post #136
roody15 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes its like they are shaping reality and attempting to cause social unrest. What the ultimate aim of such a narrative is I am unsure? Just keep people divided? Get more viewers who are "outraged"? Dystopic

The only thing they need from viewers is eyeballs. Truth and facts don’t get you eyeballs, outrage and propaganda do. It is insanely hard to present only facts and be truthful and impartial. It is quite easy to pick a narrative and stick to it, damn the facts. MSM is funded by advertisers and big corporations. They’ll do what their money masters want them to - vilifying unions is a good example.

I don't think you need the "do what their money masters want" part.

CNN has a liberal audience. If they ran multiple headlines on this (whether automated or just articles written by different editors) I'm sure the one that paints Rittenhouse as without any justification will get more clicks. And therefore its more likely those writers will be promoted internally based on performance + those who are covering the story will continue to cover the story instead of moving to something else.

Look at a site like Reddit. It takes user submitted headlines for news stories. And depending on the subreddit the headliens will always skew one way politically without the need for money dictating things.

Post reply on HN