471–480 of 872 posts
The extent of the "censorship" is getting ridiculous. It is an overreach of the platforms.
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…
If it's nonsense, then why censor it? If it's not nonsense, then why censor it?
> If it's nonsense, then why censor it? Because people believe the nonsense and then storm the capital, and/or support overturning democratic elections in order to allow would-be dictators to seize power. Misinformation can have a serious and deeply negative impact on the world, and the general public is clearly not immune to it.
In this specific debate, if "misinformation" is forbidden, whoever gets to decide what is classified as "misinformation", will control society.
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.
Soave (co-host of The Hill’s morning show: Rising) wrote an article about it here: https://reason.com/2022/03/03/youtube-rising-the-hill-electi... > YouTube has taken the position that merely acknowledging an utterance of the false claim is the same thing as making the claim yourself unless you correct and disavow it elsewhere in the video. It is also sufficient to post a warning label in the video's description that…
What nonsense from YouTube. Do they really think putting in such disclaimers is actually going to change anyone's mind?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's not weird at all that the mainstream media wouldn't publish such a story without multiple sources right before an election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biden%E2%80%93Ukraine_conspira...
Seems a bit weird, there is quite a story there [0]. In the grand scheme of things is looks like a pretty routine case of potential corruption, but that being associated with the president's son like a big deal. Vigorously suppressing the story was a pretty suspect move. The complaint seems to be that the corruption he was probably involved in is slightly different than the corruption Trump was talking about. Which a…
> In the grand scheme of things is looks like a pretty routine case of potential corruption, but that being associated with the president's son like a big deal
If you're making the claim that simply being on a board of directors or part of a venture firm because of who you know or are related to is ipso facto corruption, unfortunately we're unlikely to ever rid ourselves of that short of random work assignments in some kind of scifi YA novel.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not at all. Google is a private concern with the right to publish or not any content they see fit. That they can defacto censor opinions they don’t approve of is a failure of the market.
Corporations do not have rights, they are government-defined entities—not people. There's no "Bill of Corporate Rights" or "UN Convention on Corporate Rights." Corporations have locally-defined privileges and exist by, and at, the will of the people where they reside. Governments can change what those privileges are at any moment, for any reason—or no reason at all. If we don't like what Google is doing, we can simpl…
If you've got a better way to stop the spread of malicious lies and misinformation, please share with the class! If you're Republican, conservative or "libertarian" (riiiight), you need to be quiet and go sit in the corner while the rest of us decide what to do with you.
Super liberal, don't agree with this move at all. It's one thing to have people making false claims, but covering the former president tying of election his claim to the current Ukraine crises should not fall into that category.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Heres an example: Bari Weiss was fired for commissioning an op-ed by a US Senator Tom Cotton calling for the national guard to be called in to break up riots. Note that she did not write the essay, but merely commissioned it. They sometimes have op-eds from varying voices. NY Times apologized and said "This review made clear that a rushed editorial process led to the publication of an Op-Ed that did not meet our stan…
Are you arguing that Bari Weiss, who was brought in specifically as part of an editorial decision to appeal to alternate viewpoints, is an example of alternate viewpoints being censored?