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

YouTube deletes rapper's 'Let's Go Brandon' song claiming medical misinformation

foxnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

711–720 of 814 posts

Re: YouTube deletes rapper's 'Let's Go Brandon' song claiming medical misinformation

#711

Post by prepend »

heavyset_go wrote: post #455
prepend wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of YouTube is screeching, inane people. I’m not sure why brands would care whether their ads play over antivax conspiracies vs guys eating hair cake and throwing up on each other. I’m not sure how conspiracy theories are more harmful than just tons of other things.

Tons of inane content ends up getting demonitized on YouTube because it isn't advertiser friendly.

And tons doesn’t. I think the issue I have is I don’t understand what gets to make money and what doesn’t. Since there’s no transparency, it seems arbitrary to me.

Re: YouTube deletes rapper's 'Let's Go Brandon' song claiming medical misinformation

#712

Post by pstuart »

wernercd wrote: post #595
ycombigator wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely it's selling presidential favours? The whole Hunter art work stuff is ridiculously dubious... And yes, equal concern for any president. Trump largely cared mostly about stuffing his pockets full of money.

"trump largely cared" and biden gets a cut from his family making millions on his name while he destroys America.. how is he not about "stuffing his pockets"?

I missed the part where America got destroyed by this. Could you clue me in?

Re: YouTube deletes rapper's 'Let's Go Brandon' song claiming medical misinformation

#714

Post by GauntletWizard »

lalaland1125 wrote: post #618
lettergram wrote: post #617

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bank account reporting: https://news.yahoo.com/hot-water-emails-uncovered-show-10061... The senate report has interesting stuff https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/HSGAC_Finance_Rep... There’s also that time biden got the prosecutor investigating burisma fired (by withholding funds). https://www.wsj.com/video/opinion-joe-biden-forced-ukraine-t... Seems an awful like what Trump was impeached for...

You clearly didn't read my comment. I specifically pointed out that the bank account story couldn't have been suppressed because it only came out recently.

I want you to repeat those words to yourself out loud: "the bank account story couldn't have been suppressed because it only came out recently"

Do it twice. It's okay, we'll wait.

Re: YouTube deletes rapper's 'Let's Go Brandon' song claiming medical misinformation

#715

Post by TameAntelope »

matthewmarkus wrote: post #695
TameAntelope wrote: post #622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally impossible as long as the First Amendment exists. You cannot compel speech with legislation the way you apparently want to. Section 230 is just a way to shortcut litigation, the First Amendment is ultimately the protector of YouTube, and will remain so as long as the United States remains a country. Repealing 230 would just trigger a new set of lawsuits, one of which would end up in front of the Supreme Cou…

I don't want to compel speech. I want to reattach a cost or liability to YouTube that was removed via state power. Remember, Stratton Oakmont, Inc. v. Prodigy Services Co. "held that Prodigy was liable as the publisher of the content created by its users because it exercised editorial control over the messages on their bulletin boards in three ways: 1) by posting Content Guidelines for users, 2) by enforcing those gu…

That doesn't matter, because The First Amendment still prevents the US government from stopping YouTube from existing as a platform for content it does not produce. It's a simple concept of "who did this?" and if it's not YouTube, then it's not liable.

I notice you ignored completely the articles I linked, and didn't even bother to address the myriad arguments put forward by legal experts on this issue. I assume that's because you have no legal standing whatsoever, and would prefer to just say, "This is what I want and I don't care if the country has to cease to exist first."

Additionally, I find it highly hypocritical that you post such an opinion on a platform that would be shut down, were you to magically get your way. When you have to express your opinion in a way that wouldn't be allowed if your opinion were shared, you might want to rethink your position. It makes your position look wholly unconsidered, which it apparently is.

Re: YouTube deletes rapper's 'Let's Go Brandon' song claiming medical misinformation

#716

Post by TameAntelope »

irl_chad wrote: post #636
TameAntelope wrote: post #622

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally impossible as long as the First Amendment exists. You cannot compel speech with legislation the way you apparently want to. Section 230 is just a way to shortcut litigation, the First Amendment is ultimately the protector of YouTube, and will remain so as long as the United States remains a country. Repealing 230 would just trigger a new set of lawsuits, one of which would end up in front of the Supreme Cou…

The idea isn’t repealing 230 - it’s to recognise any platform that’s manually curating content as a publisher. Then if that publisher hosts illegal content, they’re liable, because if they can curate some of the content, they should be responsible for all of it. Also political feasibility in the USA isn’t the end-all be-all. YouTube certainly wants to do business in other countries/regions - such as the EU. Google is…

Curation is not, has not, and will never be, the bar for determining what is and isn't a platform or a publisher. Curation is an expression of free speech, which is different from the role a publisher plays in works it publishes.

Your entire argument hinges on people not realizing there's a specific legal definition of the word "publisher", which means that no matter what politicians you convince to do what you want, it will never function as expected in the judiciary.

Re: YouTube deletes rapper's 'Let's Go Brandon' song claiming medical misinformation

#717

Post by pvaldes »

barnesto wrote: post #469
crazy_horse wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Trump was removed from all forms of social media, but tell us how you hate conservatives and their empty rhetoric. Guess that also means that the Trump administration was in close contact with the tech companies to ensure they banned him.

He practically removed himself by being unable to behave in a normal way. Can't blame other than himself by what happened.

The capitol issue was just the last nail in his social coffin. Is too late to play the damsel in distress and the victim here.

Re: YouTube deletes rapper's 'Let's Go Brandon' song claiming medical misinformation

#718

Post by GauntletWizard »

rpmisms wrote: post #692
loonster wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amen. I just wish that all politicians would remain more consistent in their views, or at the very least admit that they previously said the opposite but have since changed their mind. I do not intend for this post to be anti Biden. Trump is also a hypocrite, just not on his pro covid vaccine stance.

I have some interest in politics, and I've decided that I'll be open about public vs personal views. For example: "I personally believe X, but my constituents overwhelmingly support Y, so I will be voting for Y."

You should also be open about when you choose to disagree - "I know my constituents believe Y, and I see their arguments. I have spent much time evaluating it and assigned some of my best staff to make arguments for and against, and will be voting X."

Re: YouTube deletes rapper's 'Let's Go Brandon' song claiming medical misinformation

#719

Post by newbie2020 »

tragictrash wrote: post #697
lettergram wrote: post #468

For those who think this isn’t political, check out what they posted on the POTUS Twitter the day before https://twitter.com/potus/status/1451544259992203266 The goal of this is to reclaim “let’s go Brandon” and it’s obvious. EDIT: for those who don’t know what “Let’s go Brandon” means, a child comment linked to a 40 second video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kQ8asiDn2_A&feature=youtu.be For those who don’t watch or…

The video has the lines "pandemic ain't real, they planned it". That's called disinformation, and it was removed as such.

Half the songs out there contain disinformation. Is YouTube going to get rid of them all?

Re: YouTube deletes rapper's 'Let's Go Brandon' song claiming medical misinformation

#720

Post by dang »

kyle_martin1 wrote: post #85
lazyjones wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very sad... I guess this kind of censorship / denialism is becoming an accepted practice in certain circles. I would have thought the moderators here are bigger than that.

HN is mostly young San Francisco folks. Children act like children after all. :-)

"Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community."

"When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

p.s. I don't know about age, but only about 10% of HN users were in the Bay Area, last time I ran the numbers, and that was for a much larger region than most people refer to as the Bay Area (a 200-mile diameter circle IIRC). The SF number would be well below that.

Post reply on HN