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

YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

unherd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 596 posts

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#141

Post by oh_sigh »

alexpetralia wrote: post #19
SeanLuke wrote: post #14

> professor of medicine According to this guy's Wikipedia page, he has claimed many times to be a professor of oncology at Imperial College: but he is not, and Imperial College has sought legal options to stop him from making this claim. The page is full of other fairly astonishing stuff, not the least of which is apparent fraud connected with the Lockerbie Bombing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karol_Sikora I get th…

This is the quote from Wikipedia: "Sikora told The Guardian that he did not know he would be used in the ad campaign, and that he agreed with Obama about the American health care system. In the attack ad, Sikora was referred to as professor of oncology at Imperial College. This led Imperial to seek legal advice to stop Sikora from claiming to be a professor of cancer medicine at Imperial; a claim that he was understo…

Not understanding where exactly you have been a professor for the past 22 years isn't credibility eradicating?

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#142

Post by atomashpolskiy »

Lots of great points made in this thread. Question is, what can we do about it as a collection of individuals? Hackers often like to pretend to be apolitical, when faced with political issues. No wonder, escaping from the turmoils of the real world in technology has always been a sweet sweet delusion. Now the technology itself becomes an instrument of politics, and there's no place left to hide.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#143

Post by ksk »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #135
otikik wrote: post #4

Is it this Karol Sikora? > Promotion of alternative medicine > Sikora and the School of Medicine at Buckingham have in the past been supportive of alternative medicine. For a short time, Buckingham offered a diploma in "integrated medicine" (a relatively recent euphemism for alternative medicine). Sikora was a Foundation Fellow of Prince Charles' now-defunct alternative medicine lobby group The Prince's Foundation fo…

With this reasoning, all food videos showing desserts with high calories and high sugar content should be banned, since obesity is an epidemic that kills and is harmful.

The guidelines are obviously written by a lawyer so Google can have it both ways. (To be fair, most content platforms would have similar lawyerly policies)

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#144

Post by JungleGymSam »

spiderfarmer wrote: post #121
root_axis wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don’t want youtube to be in charge of deciding what is credible or not This point is often repeated during discussions on these topics but I believe this is an inaccurate characterization. YouTube is not "in charge of deciding what is credible" in the fashion that kind of phrasing suggests; they are moderating the content on their platform with respect to their business process and company values, those decisions…

A lot of people who blame Youtube for oppressing their right to disinform other people, would immediately oppress other people if they had the chance.

Sounds so scary! I'm shivering with fear. Thank you, YouTube! I'm too stupid to think for myself.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#145

Post by Justsignedup »

AbrahamParangi wrote: post #123
root_axis wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don’t want youtube to be in charge of deciding what is credible or not This point is often repeated during discussions on these topics but I believe this is an inaccurate characterization. YouTube is not "in charge of deciding what is credible" in the fashion that kind of phrasing suggests; they are moderating the content on their platform with respect to their business process and company values, those decisions…

I’ll reiterate a point I’ve made before: the ultimate question is whether YouTube (and other social media platforms) should be permitted both the power to control on their platform as well as the freedom from liability of a common carrier. They exist in a limbo where they have their cake and eat it too- which I think is ultimately untenable.

The problem we face is that social media is about echoing information, not validity, which is how misinformation spreads so rapidly, because it sounds like what people want to hear.

There is no precedent in human history in such a thing. A private entity which controls so much public understanding and opinion.

Making YouTube liable for content would go a long way in helping keep YT content honest, and solve the moderator problem. YT will either moderate or die.

The reason YT could get so popular is because they neither have to moderate, nor fact check, but still get the benefits of being informational. This is true for ALL social media, unfortunately. How would one go about moderating the thousands of hours of content produced every hour in TikTok? Etc.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#146

Post by joshuamorton »

aianus wrote: post #120
joshuamorton wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two questions: did the Canadian government actively recommend against mask wearing? Do you live in Canada? Note the difference between "we can't condone masks because there is limited evidence that they are helpful" and "we recommend against masks because they are harmful" and "the lockdown is a government consipracy to subjugate us".

I live in Canada and they actively recommended against cloth mask wearing for the general public on the grounds that it leads to a "false sense of security" and "increases touching of one's face" and that asymptomatic persons do not spread COVID-19. "Putting a mask on an asymptomatic person is not beneficial". You can listen to Theresa Tam's (Canada's version of Dr. Fauci) exact words here: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/…

So here's what she said:

- Prioritizing supply to healthcare workers is of the utmost priority

- Current evidence supports wearing a mask if you're sick to prevent spreading droplets, also wearing a mask if you're in close contact with a symptomatic person

- Masks can provide a false sense of security.

Her final statement is "if people try to use these measures, they have to be really, really careful and wash their hands, absolutely. That's the key. So we're also worried about the potential negative impacts."

All of that is sound advice, and it is dangerous to think that a mask will protect you without any other precautions. But it isn't a statement that one should not wear a mask, fullstop. It's a statement that one should still follow other cautions. IOW, a mask isn't a magical solution.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#147

Post by dang »

lmilcin wrote: post #138

(redacted voluntarily)

Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN. Internet threads can't handle denunciatory rhetoric without collapsing. It's the way the medium works, and we have to consciously compensate for it, if we're going to keep curious conversation going here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#148

Post by MattGaiser »

xhkkffbf wrote: post #16
benjaminwootton wrote: post #2

Wow that’s dangerous. The interviewee is an ex director at the WHO with over 50 years experience as an Oncologist. He's being deplatformed for even slightly questioning the conventional wisdom. Wow! These tech companies hold way too much power. https://mobile.twitter.com/ProfKarolSikora

Even if he's a raving insane person, he should be left online. Indeed, they probably don't censor the people who are truly insane because that's obvious to any viewer. They only censor the people who say things they don't like.

> Indeed, they probably don't censor the people who are truly insane because that's obvious to any viewer. They only censor the people who say things they don't like.

Alex Jones?

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#149

Post by dpeterson »

Libertarian leaning myself, sad to say, this is the first time I am now in full realization that monopolies do in fact exist and are very dangerous. Platforms like Youtube are beyond ubiquitous and we all depend on them. The companies behind them have more money than countries. That, combined with the tax free private foundations their founders nearly all have, is taking us down some very bad roads. Of course, those roads are always paved with the best intentions and for our own good. I think it is well past time government step in and limit the power and control mega corporations flex on their platforms and on our public policy in nearly all matters.

Re: YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy

#150

Post by [deleted] »

dlp211 wrote: post #119
downerending wrote: post #87

Instead of pussyfooting around, it'd be nice if YouTube would just tell us explicitly what we're supposed to think.

You act like information isn't constantly being curated in all forms of knowledge delivery. The same way we don't tolerate students attempting to derail professors in class with unfounded hypothesis or flawed logical arguments, Youtube doesn't have to tolerate the same on its platform. Disclaimer: Work at Google, thoughts are my own.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN