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

461–470 of 872 posts

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

#461

Post by pyuser583 »

rootusrootus wrote: post #391
pyuser583 wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if the discarded ballots Gore fought to save had been counted, Bush would have won. It was very close. Close enough to reveal the messiness that extremely close elections can create. But not enough to change the outcome. Bush won. He probably won by double digits in Florida. But he still won. As late as 2008, Howard Dean was falsely claiming SCOTUS had “snatched” the election from the Dems, which was demonstrabl…

> Trump is spreading disinformation, as Howard Dean President Trump. What was Howard Dean? The distinction really matters. > They allowed the charade of a campaign to go on, allowing Democrats a heavy advantage in elections like the Wisconsin State Supreme Court. Primaries are not elections, though, and there is no reason a political party has to call them off just because someone believes the game has already been e…

I’m not criticizing the political parties for keeping the fake campaign going. A clever trick on their part.

I’m criticizing the press for not calling the winner.

In most elections, the press takes their duty of calling the winner very, very seriously. Almost like it’s a constitutional role.

And yet when it would have mattered, they decided not to.

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

#462

Post by dukeofdoom »

Youtube is fighting populism. The common people no longer believe anything the mighty have to say. You can see it in this reporters eyes when he gets relentlessly mocked during the trucker protests in Canada.

https://twitter.com/glen_mcgregor/status/1495146891646013443

This is a path where all this censorship will lead to if they don't stop it. It will be as bad for the modern day Oligarchs as it was for the French nobility during the revolution, if they can't control it. But the problem is during the last year only more and more trust has been eroded. All week on twitter Pfizer, and vaccine side effects has been trending. Today on twitter it's "They lied" is trending. You can see how alarming this is to some at the top.

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

#463

Post by downandout »

jmull wrote: post #245
pokstad wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It’s sad that youtube can choose what content to host? It’s sad that not everyone agrees with all the choices they make? Doesn’t seem sad to me. The alternative, where youtube cannot choose what content to host, seems sad to me.

It’s sad that youtube can choose what content to host?

As I suspect you know, his point was that it’s sad that YouTube is making politically motivated censorship decisions, just like China would. While we all know that Silicon Valley leans left, I think that those of us who want good things for the world would like to believe that these companies can check their politics at the door when it comes to running platforms that serve people across the political spectrum. Sadly, that’s not the case.

If YouTube identified itself as a partisan platform where speech that is not left leaning is in danger of being curtailed (which is what it is), I wouldn’t have a problem with these actions. But it masquerades as a neutral platform that is open to all, in the same way that CNN, MSNBC, and Fox masquerade as news outlets. That is a threat to democracy, because it creates the impression that only content which aligns with the platform owner’s political ideology is newsworthy or acceptable for viewing, and anything else is fringe.

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

#464

Post by pyuser583 »

rootusrootus wrote: post #391
pyuser583 wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if the discarded ballots Gore fought to save had been counted, Bush would have won. It was very close. Close enough to reveal the messiness that extremely close elections can create. But not enough to change the outcome. Bush won. He probably won by double digits in Florida. But he still won. As late as 2008, Howard Dean was falsely claiming SCOTUS had “snatched” the election from the Dems, which was demonstrabl…

> Trump is spreading disinformation, as Howard Dean President Trump. What was Howard Dean? The distinction really matters. > They allowed the charade of a campaign to go on, allowing Democrats a heavy advantage in elections like the Wisconsin State Supreme Court. Primaries are not elections, though, and there is no reason a political party has to call them off just because someone believes the game has already been e…

Howard Dean was speaking in his official capacity of head of the DNC. He was literally being paid by the Democratic Party to say what he said.

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

#466

Post by rhino369 »

virgildotcodes wrote: post #235
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > If it's instructions on drinking bleach, why censor it? >Not comparable. Nor did it ever actually happen. https://www.dailywire.com/news/fact-check-no-trump-did-not-t... https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/jul/11/joe-biden/... https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/live-blog/202... Not anywhere will you find Trump saying to “inject bleach”. That was the media narrative, completely their words.

> And then I said supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way. And I think you said you’re going to test that too. Sounds interesting. And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning? Seems to me like he is very clearly talking ab…

I don't really want to defend Trump, who is proudly stupid and mean spirited. But at bottom, it was a question about whether it was feasible, not a suggestion.

And "something like that" in his statement is not necessarily just filler. Read charitably, he could be asking if a similar effect can be achieved with something else. We use some types of disinfectants for broadly similar effects--like mouth wash. In the past, we've used iodine to disinfect water for drinking, which was ingested.

I'm not saying its a plausible strategy, but its not pants on fire stupid to wonder out-loud if you can get something like a disinfectant inside. I'd imagine you can't, but I can't articulate why you can't beyond the likelihood the required concentrations would destroy your bodies' cells too.

I watched that press conference on tv when it aired. It wasn't even the top 20 dumbest things he said in that conference.

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

#467

Post by jquery »

hammock wrote: post #11
freedomben wrote: post #7

One of the hosts wrote this about it [1]: particularly appropriate quote: > What casual observers might not understand, however, is just how far the policy goes. Not only does YouTube punish channels that spread misinformation, but in many cases, it also punishes channels that report on the spread of misinformation. The platform makes no distinction between the speaker and the content creator. If a channel produces a…

Oceania was at war with Eastasia. Oceania had always been at war with Eastasia.

Please stop using 1984 to make extremely insipid and banal points that don't even really make sense in context. This doesn't really map to anything in 1984, if anything Google makes an attempt to say there is such thing as a shared reality, and that reality isn't just whatever the propagandists say it is.

EDIT: all these talking points are the same ones I remember the alt-right getting in a tizzy about when Google started adding information about the Holocaust under holocaust-denial sewage.

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

#468

Post by _yoqn »

dillondoyle wrote: post #191
freedomben wrote: post #7

One of the hosts wrote this about it [1]: particularly appropriate quote: > What casual observers might not understand, however, is just how far the policy goes. Not only does YouTube punish channels that spread misinformation, but in many cases, it also punishes channels that report on the spread of misinformation. The platform makes no distinction between the speaker and the content creator. If a channel produces a…

It's just bad 'AI' because they won't give up revenue to do what would be required to actually avoid censorship while still cracking down on coordinated bs. I think we need a better word than censorship. More like inept penny pinchers.

Is "cracking down on coordinated bs" not also censorship?

How about letting people simply evaluate the information for themselves?

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

#469

Post by shadowgovt »

bko wrote: post #330
jmull wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s sad that youtube can choose what content to host? It’s sad that not everyone agrees with all the choices they make? Doesn’t seem sad to me. The alternative, where youtube cannot choose what content to host, seems sad to me.

Let be real here. It's very likely the former guy may run again. You may be against that, as would I. But I think its pretty creepy that a handful of large tech CEOs will be able to get together and prevent that from happening by shutting him off from every social media platform and biasing search results, even so far as censoring our private communications via FB messenger, email or similar chat apps. You want to ar…

> But I think its pretty creepy that a handful of large tech CEOs will be able to get together and prevent that from happening by shutting him off from every social media platform and biasing search results, even so far as censoring our private communications via FB messenger, email or similar chat apps.

None of what you've described would prevent him from running. And in fact, thanks to Streisand Effect, much of it centers him in the public eye.

You can't buy that kind of publicity.

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

#470

Post by shadowgovt »

lordnacho wrote: post #401
car_analogy wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Against government authoritarians. You have no shield against private oligopolies.

Really? What's the difference? It's not whether it's public or private making the decisions (they are both considering the amount spent in lobbying), it's the degree of control you ought to worry about. There needs to be an actual free market where people have a realistic set of alternatives. Pointing out public versus private is IMO misidentifying the problem.

> Really? What's the difference?

For starters, Google doesn't get to raise a private army or arrest The Hill for misuse of their services.

Post reply on HN