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

Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 213 posts

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#71

Post by mbell »

salimmadjd wrote: post #60
mbell wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does this video meet that definition?

How it doesn't? This brings in an interesting issue, google based on their own guidelines are in the position of interpreting what is hate speech and what isn't. Who at google makes that decision? Who are these people? Do they have a biased?

> How it doesn't?

Well, lets start with the fact that it doesn't say anything about a group of people at all. It specifically speaks to only a few individuals. No where in the content of this video does it advocate any sort of physical or political action against Muslims at large.

The fact that some people have decided to take it as a personal attack is immaterial and reading more into what was actually said than is there. If Google got into the business of pulling any content some group of people may find offensive the site would be empty.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#72

Post by cheald »

[deleted] wrote: post #65
cheald wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We have to ask why on earth the White House should even care if the video violates Google's TOS. This was as close as they could get to a takedown request without violating the Constitution. Really disgraceful, IMO.

[deleted]

I haven't missed the news. I'm well aware of the video and what it's been used as an excuse to do.

I'm also aware that this request is effectively the White House requesting that content be repressed on political grounds, which is wholly antithetical to one of the core principles by which our government is run.

It's trivial, by watching the video and by reading Google's TOS to say "oh, that's clearly not a violation". What the White House did is say "We want you to take that video down, and here's an excuse you can use to do it", which is Not Okay.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#73

Post by salimmadjd »

moskie wrote: post #53
salimmadjd wrote: post #35

YouTube should have removed the video based on their own guidelines. This can be classified as a hate speech. http://www.youtube.com/t/community_guidelines : We encourage free speech and defend everyone's right to express unpopular points of view. But we don't permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orien…

Exactly. Now, my question is, why _doesn't_ this video violate that guideline? Isn't its entire purpose to denigrate Islam?

Google is just pissed off they were not credited for any kind of revolution like twitter was and now they don't want to lose their opportunity.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#74

Post by Steko »

roboneal wrote: post #46
mef wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The WP article specifies that there must be threat of legal sanction. There was no threat in this case, only a request.

They could have quietly clicked "Flag as inappropriate" as anyone else. Instead, they made a public "request" whose intent was to put pressure on Google outside it's normal "review process".

They could have done lots of things. Using soft pressure in various ways is not something that's new to governments or generally detrimental or something that's ever going to go away.

I guess Obama could also have written an anonymous letter to the editor instead of having a speech announcing and advocating his jobs programs. But that's not how the real world works. Obama openly and strongly advocating X, Y and Z is not tyranny.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#76

Post by drhowarddrfine »

nostromo wrote: post #17
roboneal wrote: post #12

Does the Obama administration really want to enter the business of suppressing every "inconvenient" video that might offend the sensibilities of Middle Eastern mobs?

It was just a request. A request they are free to make and Google is free to decline. One (edit: four) of Obama's civilian employees was killed by an angry mob, ostensibly because of this video, so I don't think it's unreasonable to ask. I'm also glad Google declined.

And this is something that just mystifies people in many foreign countries.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#77

Post by _pius »

koko775 wrote: post #70
powertower wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ostensibly because of this video That video had nothing to do with anyone being killed. It was an excuse used by the mob to justify their desire for murder and violence, so they would not appear as complete savages. I've watched that video, and the worst I can describe it is with words: "silly" and "amateurish". It wouldn’t even pass the litmus test for the type of speech that incites violence. It’s clear that thos…

You're getting into dangerously ignorant territory with those words, and you haven't even done your research. Stop. That has no place here. The protest, by some accounts, was for the most part not violent. The violence that did happen was a planned and targeted action perpetrated by a highly trained militia exploiting the cover of the protests. Reinforcements were delayed intentionally, and the second attack clearly…

I'm not sure why the parent is being downvoted, but it's consistent with the intelligence that's been released.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#78

Post by kfinley »

nostromo wrote: post #17
roboneal wrote: post #12

Does the Obama administration really want to enter the business of suppressing every "inconvenient" video that might offend the sensibilities of Middle Eastern mobs?

It was just a request. A request they are free to make and Google is free to decline. One (edit: four) of Obama's civilian employees was killed by an angry mob, ostensibly because of this video, so I don't think it's unreasonable to ask. I'm also glad Google declined.

I'm more concerned by this:

>U.S. authorities said on Friday that they were investigating whether the film's producer, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, a 55-year old Egyptian Coptic Christian living in Southern California, had violated terms of his prison release. Basseley was convicted in 2010 for bank fraud and released from prison on probation last June.

This sets a bad precedence. "If you create something that we disagree with, you will be investigated". With the ever expanding number of laws we have in this country -- we are all, most certainly, guilty of something.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#79

Post by Steko »

roboneal wrote: post #69
Steko wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So just because you ate X for lunch today you should eat X for lunch everyday? See it makes sense with could but with should it's a nonsense claim. The WH, just like you me, the GOP, ze Germans, Al Qaeda, whoever are all free to request that YT review any video. Is this the end of the world? Does making such a request ever attach a weak compulsion to review and request the same of any other video that might weakly ov…

I have to disagree. You and I are pretty much stuck clicking "Flag" on Youtube. The White House gets to use the power of the bully pulpit to make such a "request" and Al Qaeda storms a few embassies and murders diplomats to make their "request".

I may not have made this clear but my argument wasn't that we all have the same way to report things but that we're all free to advocate for YT to do anything we want to advocate for.

I'm sorry you're not as powerful as the president but that's just reality. If I don't like the leather iCal in OS X I get to say that in comments 100 people read. If John Gruber doesn't like it he gets a million Apple users and employees to listen to him. Jony Ive's opinion even more powerful. Things aren't equal.

Re: Google rejects White House request to pull Mohammad film clip

#80

Post by salimmadjd »

malandrew wrote: post #63
salimmadjd wrote: post #35

YouTube should have removed the video based on their own guidelines. This can be classified as a hate speech. http://www.youtube.com/t/community_guidelines : We encourage free speech and defend everyone's right to express unpopular points of view. But we don't permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orien…

I haven't spent the time to watch the video, but from what others have said, the video is about a person (Mohammed) and not about a group of people. That being said, I don't see how it could be hate speech. The most it could be is slanderous/libelous. A similar video about Jesus or any other individual, involved with a religion or not, would be the same. Were the video about a group of people with some common identif…

The makers of this video have admitted the purpose of the video was to denigrate Islam. Shouldn't that be enough in itself to classify this as hate speech. Also this issue bring a very interesting point. How google make these type of judgment. Do they have legal experts viewing these videos and making decision as such?

There is a lot of important issues being brought up as a result. How do we identify hate speech, who makes that kind of a judgement, what's the role of distribution channels in these cases, how much power the government has, is there a bigger responsibility for unseen cases?

Post reply on HN