YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud • Hacker News Board

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#601

Post by miguelmota » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 10:27 PM UTC

cambalache wrote: post #421

GordonS wrote: post #400

I don't like what YouTube is doing. But... What is going on in the US just now is unprecedented in modern Western democracies - we've reached "peak fake news" in the USA. Mainstream news networks like Fox have talking heads spouting venomous lies that are demonstrably and trivially proven as such. The POTUS is lying on an hourly basis (many of those lies just brazenly , ridiculously false), and has millions of people…

> But... There is no "buts" regarding freedom. I dont know if you have any experience with authoritarian measures but none of them starts like "This is a bad and permanent measure for no reason"... all of them are "exceptional", "to ensure public safety" ,"only valid as long as extraordinary circumstances are present"..all of them. The democrats were claiming fraud 4 years go due to a supposed Russian influence.The e…

It's a slippery slope for sure. I think a big concern is that if far-reaching conspiracy theories are allowed to flourish then it could lead to the development of more extremist groups using scapegoating tactics to influence violence on particular groups. I see both sides of the argument.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#602

Post by neogodless » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 10:27 PM UTC

jrockway wrote: post #529

GordonS wrote: post #400

I don't like what YouTube is doing. But... What is going on in the US just now is unprecedented in modern Western democracies - we've reached "peak fake news" in the USA. Mainstream news networks like Fox have talking heads spouting venomous lies that are demonstrably and trivially proven as such. The POTUS is lying on an hourly basis (many of those lies just brazenly , ridiculously false), and has millions of people…

I think the difference between now and the past is that everyone can exercise their constitutional right to free speech. Free speech used to be somewhat expensive -- by the time you've gone to journalism school and have been hired by someone with a media outlet, you've become the establishment. You want to tell a good story and hold those in power to account, but you know that you have a reputation and you can throw…

First, I think this is a great comment and worth discussing.

Second, I'm not sure I agree with your assertion that we (entities with the capability and responsibility) should be required to allow something fundamentally dangerous to the nation's integrity to be an amplified message.

The reasoning is that to get to "every human being to get a great education", we need a phenomenal, unified, progressive nation that values education very highly. To get people to willingly interact with people that look different from them, we need a shared belief in the value of diversity. I believe we have evidence that large proportions of the population are readily influenced and manipulated by media, and of course peer-sourced media may have become even more powerful than what was once reputation-based journalism.

Now, I don't think cutting off the amplification of substantially dangerous ideas does fix the underlying problem, but it seems rational to believe it is currently contributing to the problem. It's in the causal chain. To reach the better society you envision, we need the same elements we hope to achieve - great education and humanity and valuing diversity. Basically, it's hoping that the majority of individuals flip a switch and embrace the changes we need, and from there we can continue to propagate the change.

I don't feel like I have the answers, because it's a difficult problem, and I don't believe the trajectory is currently positive. Spreading misinformation is getting easier. Accepting misinformation seems to be growing more prevalent. A once seemingly foregone conclusion of the inevitable ubiquitous acceptance of diversity appears to be tragically stalled. The entities we elected to solve these problems are no longer content to work together in civil discussion and compromise in order to discover and implement potential solutions.

If there's a choice between the band-aid of social media trying to put a finger in the dam to stop the flooding, and an effective remedy to the core problems, I'll gladly choose the remedy, but given the apparent non-existence of such a remedy, I'll begrudgingly accept the band-aid.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#603

Post by MrBuddyCasino » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 10:28 PM UTC

cambalache wrote: post #421

GordonS wrote: post #400

I don't like what YouTube is doing. But... What is going on in the US just now is unprecedented in modern Western democracies - we've reached "peak fake news" in the USA. Mainstream news networks like Fox have talking heads spouting venomous lies that are demonstrably and trivially proven as such. The POTUS is lying on an hourly basis (many of those lies just brazenly , ridiculously false), and has millions of people…

> But... There is no "buts" regarding freedom. I dont know if you have any experience with authoritarian measures but none of them starts like "This is a bad and permanent measure for no reason"... all of them are "exceptional", "to ensure public safety" ,"only valid as long as extraordinary circumstances are present"..all of them. The democrats were claiming fraud 4 years go due to a supposed Russian influence.The e…

"30% of what consists the US Federation make a plea in terms of electoral fraud, in the Supreme Court. And there is no coverage by the media.

Current front pages from CNN, Washington Post, New York Times, BBC (for future reference)." [0]

[0] https://twitter.com/_benoux_/status/1336788393884323849?s=20

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#604

Post by mlazos » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 10:36 PM UTC

The posts about censorship on hn continue to baffle me. Any large media provider (YouTube, Netflix) is already censoring literally everything you see on their sites. There is simply too much content on their sites, that being truly unbiased (chronological order) would be unusable from the perspective of a single user. Given I don’t agree that a blanket ban on certain content (lies) is acceptable, I think what the issue is here is letting this content disseminate virally to millions. This absolutely can be controlled and maybe the ability of posts to go viral should be the middle ground between censorship and total free speech anarchy. I don’t think corporations will ever do this though because viral content is what makes money.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#605

Post by djsumdog » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 10:37 PM UTC

lalaland1125 wrote: post #492

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #386

Unpopular opinion: it is much better to have a leader hated by the media and who's every move is scrutinized by the press than to have a leader cowtowed by the press and given a free pass on anything. How do I know? I'm from Russia. Authoritatism begins with tight control of news sources.

This comment is really weird. There is a good reason why the media publishes more negative articles about some presidents and fewer on others; some presidents are legitimately better or worse than others.

Biden has gotten zero bad press. Twitter and Facebook literally squashed the Hunter Biden story showing evidence of strong ties to Ukraine and China. Biden has only been given softballs in interviews and the media stands behind the fact he's cognitively sound when he obviously isn't.

The media is solidly in the house of of the establishment that led to the Bush/Clinton dynasty. They do not care about the truth.

Let's look at Gov Whitmer and Cummo. Their decisions lead to the deaths of thousands of elderly because they stuffed them all together in nursing homes that were not equipped for COVID. The media has done NOTHING about this story. Cummo wrote a fucking book praising himself!!

Biden and Harris will never face the same scrutiny Trump has.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#606

Post by X6S1x6Okd1st » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 10:38 PM UTC

cambalache wrote: post #421

GordonS wrote: post #400

I don't like what YouTube is doing. But... What is going on in the US just now is unprecedented in modern Western democracies - we've reached "peak fake news" in the USA. Mainstream news networks like Fox have talking heads spouting venomous lies that are demonstrably and trivially proven as such. The POTUS is lying on an hourly basis (many of those lies just brazenly , ridiculously false), and has millions of people…

> But... There is no "buts" regarding freedom. I dont know if you have any experience with authoritarian measures but none of them starts like "This is a bad and permanent measure for no reason"... all of them are "exceptional", "to ensure public safety" ,"only valid as long as extraordinary circumstances are present"..all of them. The democrats were claiming fraud 4 years go due to a supposed Russian influence.The e…

There are plenty of counter examples, e.g. when rationing was in effect during WW2.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#607

Post by balozi » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 10:38 PM UTC

dstola wrote: post #512

Regardless of where you stand, this is _blatant_ political bias (democrats) towards an equally valid opposing viewpoint (republican) This is literally definition of a slippery slope where Google is going and would have caused an absolute outrage had it happened with the whole Russian election meddling 4 years ago. Let the freedom of expression take course, trying to control the narrative is exact opposite of democrac…

Bet you thought that the slippery slop would stop at the "deniers" and the "anti-vaxers".

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#608

Post by djsumdog » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 10:39 PM UTC

duemti wrote: post #140

I'm baffled how people support this behavior from big tech. It almost seems like they think of themselves as immune to this somehow, like little sheep unable to comprehend that they themselves once will deviate will get the same treatment (assuming they have spine to stand for what they believe).

I think back to that "First they came for the..." poem.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#609

Post by commandlinefan » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 10:40 PM UTC

dleslie wrote: post #131

Pungsnigel wrote: post #67

Will this include all videos talking of the Russia collusion?

No, because that actually happened. https://thehill.com/policy/national-security/512487-senate-p...

It doesn't matter if it actually happened or not, YouTube's exact words are "We also disallow content alleging widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome of a historical U.S. Presidential election." Nothing in there about only disallowing it if somebody believes it happened.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#610

Post by sxyuan » Wed, Dec 09, 2020, 10:42 PM UTC

helen___keller wrote: post #502

sxyuan wrote: post #303

A lot of short, knee-jerk reactions on this thread, not to mention snark and downright flame. Seeing as this is at the top of HN right now, can we try to elevate the level of discourse a little bit? A few questions to consider: 1. Is content moderation necessary in online platforms? I think the answer to this question is self-evident, but others may disagree and so I think it's worth posing. FWIW, HN has moderation,…

Just to emphasize something thats generally unstated but I think pretty important: the only reason this is even remotely newsworthy or controversial is due to how large and influential Youtube is. If I could choose between two worlds, in the first there is a single mega-platform that is moderated ultra-fairly so all people can use it, and in the second there is no megaplatform but a lot of small platforms that each m…

I agree with where you start out, but I think a proliferation of partisan platforms would simply lead to more filter bubbles and more polarization. I would much rather see the Fairness Doctrine reinstated (in the US, anyhow) and expanded to Internet platforms, than to see everyone flocking to their platform of choice, becoming even more oblivious to alternate viewpoints.