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

YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

blog.youtube

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

731–740 of 1001 posts

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#731

Post by hartator »

anigbrowl wrote: post #718
grawprog wrote: post #694

https://www.engadget.com/youtube-election-misinformation-dem... So, i'm kind of curious how it's reasonable a political party can ask for partisan censorship. >YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki received a letter on Tuesday from four Democratic senators expressing “deep concern” over the spread of election misinformation on Google’s video platform. In the letter, senators Robert Menendez of New Jersey, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii…

This isn't a company deciding, this is censorship urged by the government. I thought that kind of thing was illegal down there. Not saying anything either way about the politics of the election, but isn't this blatant government censorship? If you think it is, then why are you asking? If you're not sure, why are you asserting it (and suggesting that a party is equivalent to a government because some of its members ar…

> If you think it is, then why are you asking?

OP made a rethoric question.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#732

Post by samdlathsworth »

jonbronson wrote: post #715
grawprog wrote: post #694

https://www.engadget.com/youtube-election-misinformation-dem... So, i'm kind of curious how it's reasonable a political party can ask for partisan censorship. >YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki received a letter on Tuesday from four Democratic senators expressing “deep concern” over the spread of election misinformation on Google’s video platform. In the letter, senators Robert Menendez of New Jersey, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii…

The facts aligning in the Senator's favor does not make the request partisan. Nor are they the only political figures to reference the widely acknowledged facts that there was no spread widespread voter fraud. Prominent Republican politicians in positions of oversight have agreed with this outcome.

Then it sounds handled. Why even bother? This nanny state nonsense is downright terrifying.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#733

Post by 0x445442 »

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.

There's no way to square this statement given the coverage of Obama and Trump looking only at their policies.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#734

Post by hartator »

jonbronson wrote: post #715
grawprog wrote: post #694

https://www.engadget.com/youtube-election-misinformation-dem... So, i'm kind of curious how it's reasonable a political party can ask for partisan censorship. >YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki received a letter on Tuesday from four Democratic senators expressing “deep concern” over the spread of election misinformation on Google’s video platform. In the letter, senators Robert Menendez of New Jersey, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii…

The facts aligning in the Senator's favor does not make the request partisan. Nor are they the only political figures to reference the widely acknowledged facts that there was no spread widespread voter fraud. Prominent Republican politicians in positions of oversight have agreed with this outcome.

> The facts aligning in the Senator's favor does not make the request partisan.

Politics requesting censorship is always partisan.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#735

Post by huffmsa »

jonbronson wrote: post #715
grawprog wrote: post #694

https://www.engadget.com/youtube-election-misinformation-dem... So, i'm kind of curious how it's reasonable a political party can ask for partisan censorship. >YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki received a letter on Tuesday from four Democratic senators expressing “deep concern” over the spread of election misinformation on Google’s video platform. In the letter, senators Robert Menendez of New Jersey, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii…

The facts aligning in the Senator's favor does not make the request partisan. Nor are they the only political figures to reference the widely acknowledged facts that there was no spread widespread voter fraud. Prominent Republican politicians in positions of oversight have agreed with this outcome.

And there was no pee-pee tape, but there are 4 years of video from MSNBC peddling that tired conspiracy theory.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#736

Post by keithnz »

owlbynight wrote: post #418

This is Orwellian bullshit. And I'll take it because I think the alternative is leading to a few greedy assholes using analytical data to successfully weaponize millions upon millions of uninformed people against logic and common sense. Do we add restrictions to voting to weed out people who habitually vote anti-facts? No. Disenfranchisement. Do we make fake news illegal? No. Censorship leading to state run media. Do…

Such a tricky situation, but I think what youtube is getting used for is actually the Orwellian bullshit. The power of youtube videos to convince people of untrue things is quite astounding. I have no idea what the right answers to any of this is. At he moment nearly any action is considered as dire in that it will either make America a communist state or it will bring a right wing dictator to power. Hopefully, what we are witnessing is robustness of the legal system and constitution amongst all the chaos.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#737

Post by autocorr »

HN user's have an interesting mix of free-speech absolutism and progressive/liberal lean. It's unfortunate that partisan invective seems to have overwhelmed more nuanced arguments of platform moderation...

I think it will be interesting to see how higher degrees of intervention and moderation break some of the assumptions of the network effect. Services may not be winner take all if there are big ideological wedges that companies can serve.

And just as a personal note on US politics, I would encourage more GOP-leaning folks to consider one important difference between a 2016-Russia and 2020-Fraud comparison. For 2016, Hillary conceded after two days, Obama welcomed Trump, there was no widespread opinion of a stolen election by the Democratic Executive or voiced by Dem US House/Senate members. The smoke focusing on "personal collusion with Russia by Trump" was by the media after the fact. The Mueller investigation was appointed by the DoJ from a bipartisan committee to investigate specifically Russian interference.

For 2020, the sitting President is loudly pushing a narrative of voter fraud and deep-state conspiracy from views he has always held. Paraphrasing: "I would have won the 2016 popular vote if 5 million people didn't vote illegally". He called the 2020 election rigged multiple times before it even happened! Like the word slippery slope gets tossed around a lot, but this really is an instance of a slope that's very slippery.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#738

Post by dukeofdoom »

nl wrote: post #722
dukeofdoom wrote: post #420

If we don't have a meaningful signature match, than we don't have a meaningful way to prevent fraud with mail in ballots. Period. Bad ballot Rejection rate of 6% in previous election to now 0.02%, with mail in ballots. Mismatched signatures resulted in a rejection for only 0.02% of all absentee ballots cast. How is that even possible. They counted almost everything. For those of you that think its unfair to reject ba…

> If we don't have a meaningful signature match, than we don't have a meaningful way to prevent fraud with mail in ballots. Period. This isn't true at all. We've had mail-in voting in Australia for decades, and there is no signature matching. Some US states do use it at all. Signature verification is error prone and becoming more-so as less people use their signatures regularly. > Bad ballot Rejection rate of 6% in p…

Can you expend on how the process works in Australia. Genuinely curious.

The 0.02% or the more recent 0.06% rejection rate is very low. Think of it this way. Out of 1000 people taking a test that needed two signatures, that matched. Only 2-6 did not not match. Thats an extremely low number.

This is why teachers are always reminding students not to forget to sign their test, in a class of 30, and that only requires one signature.

If you worked with the general public, and you asked them to tie their shoes, I honestly believe you would have a higher failure rate than 0.02%

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#739

Post by ed25519FUUU »

pdabbadabba wrote: post #649
muttantt wrote: post #176

This is ridiculous. Regardless of your politics, this is just going the wrong direction. Where was this policy when the other side was pushing the Russia collusion narrative for years?

The problem with this comparison is that there actually was significant evidence of collusion with Russia. If you read the Muller report you'll see it all over the place. Here's a summary: https://www.justsecurity.org/63838/guide-to-the-mueller-repo... . Reading the actual report would be better, but it is very long. Trump's repeated claim that Muller's report somehow supported his claims of "no collusion" is simply…

The entire point of the SCO was to try and shore up / verify the allegations in the Steele dossier, of which it couldn't make a single connection.

Where are the pee pee tapes? When did Cohen go to Prague to get the emails again? You'd think the SCO could have at least interviewed Julian Assange and asked him where he got the emails.

Re: YouTube to remove content that alleges widespread election fraud

#740

Post by filoleg »

wwright wrote: post #648
sakopov wrote: post #643

So, maybe I'm not understanding something, but there are numerous reports from what appear to be reputable sources -- a few listed below -- claiming that there were uncovered missing votes during recounts in Georgia. However, there isn't a word said about this on CNN, MSNBC or any other heavily left-leaning media sources. The only sources that I hear talking about this are on YouTube. I don't give a shit if I get dow…

Because the recount did exactly what was intended (found missing votes) and the result didn’t change?

Results of the election not changing isn't the point. It is the lack of retraction of the earlier "there was no election fraud" claim. Just because the number of missing votes found during the recount ended up not changing the outcome doesn't mean that the earlier claims of "there was no election fraud and missing votes" were correct, because they, according to the recount, are factually incorrect.
Post reply on HN