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

YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

tampafp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 872 posts

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#421

Post by adam_arthur »

lordnacho wrote: post #415
adam_arthur wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no evidence to support the fact that corporate greed in an otherwise competitive market leads to inflation, yet we have plenty of politicians pushing that. There's no evidence supporting price controls to be an effective way to fight inflation, as was shown to produce awful results in the 70s among many other eras, yet we have politicians pushing for that. There's no evidence to support that nominal wages ris…

Agree on the economics, but I think it's weak to compare these to the purely forensic question of whether the election was stolen. Economic opinions are generally not that clear cut, requiring an awful lot of theoretical harness and qualifications to explain. Evidence is similar, you can quibble about a lot of things in economics. Whether the election was stolen, well, where is a shred of evidence? It's not hard to d…

Most things aren't clear cut, and there have been many times in history where widely held beliefs have been proven largely false.

If you'll recall there was a multi year period of mass belief that the president colluded with Russians to steal the election. On the back of very little evidence, other than news heads talking about it and "he said, she said"

There was also a multi year investigation that found nothing, and actually was able to largely disprove documents that helped to kick off the speculation.

I believe we should mass purge all these videos proposing that the ex president colluded with Russians. We don't want the public to be misinformed.

Consider which regimes throughout history have used silencing political opposition the most, and whether you want to be aligned with them.

I certainly don't.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#423

Post by rc_mob »

qndreoi wrote: post #385

It seems they could have put a sentence on the bottom of the screen "There is no credible evidence for Trump's claim of a stolen election." Takes approximately zero effort to solve the problem.

Yeah. The Hill is claiming they were just reporting what Trump said. They have a moral duty to report that Trump is saying lies that are very dangerous to the very fabric of society.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#424

Post by FeepingCreature »

pokstad wrote: post #230
jmull wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t get why people think youtube should be forced to host stuff they don’t want to host. Youtube should be socialized and forced to become a content-neutral storage? But why?!? We have the internet, where you can rent or run your own server and storage and post your conspiracy theory videos.

No one is arguing about YouTube being forced to do things. People are discussing how sad it is that YouTube has gone down that road.

No hang on, I'm a free speech maximalist and I totally want YouTube to be forced to do things.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#425

Post by a_shovel »

cryptonector wrote: post #158

If it's nonsense, then why censor it? If it's not nonsense, then why censor it?

This argument would work equally well to support spreading neo-nazi propaganda material. Trite catchphrases are nothing to base a belief system around.

An argument doesn't have to make logical sense for it to convince millions of people. Especially not if they like the conclusion.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#426

Post by daenz »

dgellow wrote: post #388
dayvid wrote: post #127

It's scary how many of the systems we were worried about in China (e.g. social credit system, censorship, etc.) are basically being created now in the west through the proxy of critical companies blocking access and/or working together.

In China you would risk being arrested for such a thing. Not just see your channel or video taken down by a platform.

Whether it's Huxley or Orwell, they're both dystopias.

EDIT>> My mistake, censorship falls clearly under Orwell

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#427

Post by rootusrootus »

lliamander wrote: post #271
onedognight wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first “protestor” pled to seditious conspiracy just yesterday. https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/1462481/downl... Likely many other people will be pulled into this if you read the above indictment.

I'm not sure how many "many" is, but my understanding is the vast majority of people involved were merely trespassing.

What would you call it if Democrats and BLM protesters had stormed the Capitol in 2017 demanding the vice president be hanged for not agreeing to turn over the election result?

Please don't try and with a straight face claim it would be trespassing. I'd have called it insurrection.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#428

Post by koolba »

lostcolony wrote: post #200
coldtea wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's a huge difference: in Bush v. Gore, Gore stepped aside for the good of the country, choosing to respect the institution of the courts even if the decision was dodgy And why would that be the better way to go about it? Respecting an election you consider stolen that an institution favored to "respect the institution" means you're respecting a faulty institution - and encouraging similar behavior in the futur…

Because that institution then worked another four times without incident. The institution, as flawed as it is, still kept transferring power peacefully. In 2020's case, there was no dodginess, but nevertheless one candidate would rather discredit the institution rather than admit he lost, and -there is nothing to replace it with-. We've had 250 years of peaceful transfers of power because of this system; without a un…

There was plenty of dodginess in 2020, not the least of which was States executive branches unilaterally making changes to their electoral process rather than going through the Constitutional mandated legislative branch.

Many of those changes have since been thrown out by State level supreme courts for being unconstitutional: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/28/pennsylva...

But judges don’t have time machines so that doesn’t change the outcome of anything.

Anyone that can say that there is zero shenanigans in Philadelphia’s electoral process with a straight face should consider becoming a professional poker player.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#429

Post by hyperbovine »

daenz wrote: post #426
dgellow wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In China you would risk being arrested for such a thing. Not just see your channel or video taken down by a platform.

Whether it's Huxley or Orwell, they're both dystopias. EDIT>> My mistake, censorship falls clearly under Orwell

That’s a dangerous false equivalence.

Re: YouTube suspends The Hill for playing clip of Trump denying election results

#430

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

DoItToMe81 wrote: post #372
jmull wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t get why people think youtube should be forced to host stuff they don’t want to host. Youtube should be socialized and forced to become a content-neutral storage? But why?!? We have the internet, where you can rent or run your own server and storage and post your conspiracy theory videos.

Youtube is a major information source for two billion people, that has largely supplanted the online 'public space' of video hosts. No other video site is remotely comparable, and it's not even feasible for the vast majority of individuals, companies or even governments to compete with it. Google also controls the largest search platform, so good luck growing that 'conspiracy theory video' platform. I don't believe a…

> it's not even feasible for the vast majority of individuals, companies or even governments to compete with it.

You haven't defined what "compete with it" actually means here.

> Google also controls the largest search platform

If it was only a search platform, this would hardly matter, because search engines are not hard to replace. But Google search is merely the entry point to a much larger system (notably, a vast online ad platform and data collection system), and that's a problem.

Post reply on HN