National YouTube Removes More Firearms Channels from Its Partner Program

[CamoDeafie]

Its not just center to center of right channels, I've posted about this before. Its also any content they deem unacceptable to their advertisers guidelines

I noticed quite a few fashion channels disappear, along with artist resources, especially those for figure drawing; but also bodypaint, photography workshops, and the like.... even liberal protest videos are removed if theres toplessness and nudity in general.

Quite a number of music videos have been pulled because they happened to have artistic nudity, or because they promoted a centrist-right of center viewpoint

Again, it's not necessarily because of YT's own guidelines but because of advertisers... the same reasoning that Tumblr went on a crackdown of "NSFW" blogs

But its also related to the recent passage of the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act/Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act which amended 230.

FOSTA-SESTA - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Goosebrown]

I love Facebook.

I go there twice a year and see what old friends are up to. I reach out to them for a week or so then ignore it for six months.

Those that want to call, call. I can see kid pictures as needed.

What I do not do is talk politics or religion there. And I will not be drawn ingobthe endless babbling there.

 

[Rickenbacher39]

It is bad enough when people sit across from one another at a dining room table (Public or private!) and they type or text or whatever the heck it is called and they NEVER LOOK AT ONE ANOTHER IN THE EYES OR EVEN TALK TO ONE ANOTHER! I have seen that in real life and when they are walking around and NOT looking at where they are going! That goes for dumb bunny and DANGEROUS drivers who type/text too!

Cate

My wife and I go to breakfast every Thursday morning at a local small cafe.
We live in a small town of 1700 and we love it here.
We were sitting at a window table up front just enjoying ourselves and
I saw Mr. Man Bun/Skinny Jeans walking our way with his face glued to his phone.
In front of the cafe is a line of cement planters about 4 feet tall and 3 feet wide filled with flowers.
I could see it coming. They are not in the sidewalk. They are tucked up next to the wall of the building.
I told my wife to "watch this".
Sure enough, he walked straight into the first planter and face-planted into the flowers.
I don't think the laughter in the cafe stopped for at least 10 minutes.
Good times..............good times

 

[MannyGlocks]

I don't understand the hostility directed at folks who've zero interest in fakebook or twit or instantaneous-gram or redd-something or any other social media.

Much like Groucho Marx said and I'm paraphrasing: I wouldn't want to be the member of any club that would have me.

Or, in my case, I can be as selective as I choose and if that means I don't want in with your particular club, so what?

What do I not understand about this oddball hostility?

Can someone fill me in?

Thanks!!

 

[Andy54Hawken]

While I haven't experienced "hostility"...I have often experienced folks that were incredulous and truly puzzled that I do not have a FaceBook , Twitter , Gramwhathaveyou , etc account....or a cell phone.

I think that their puzzlement comes from the "Huh" factor , when faced with someone or something that does not conform with what is thought of as normal or everybody does it / has it ....Why not you...?
Which can at times bring on a stereotype image , that is now thrust upon me....
Andy

 

[awshoot]

Listen hard to what Candace Owens and Lauren Chen are saying about social media , culture and what is being missed, they are hitting the nail on the head.

For those who don't watch, one of the main takeaways is this:

Gen Z&Y will be the largest voting block in the next election and the way it gets news is through twitter/FB/youtube/instagram. The brazen corporate censorship we are seeing is evidence of how big tech intends to influence the next election.

I would add, even if you don't use mass social media (I don't) it can still hurt you and the censorship affects you.

 

[MannyGlocks]

I've yet to understand how 'social media' can influence voters.

They, it, what have you, can't change my political view one iota.

Twits, utubers, etc. can bang on all they care to, they couldn't possibly convince me to go commie.

So, are younger folk so malleable they have no conviction so can be swayed like a flag in the breeze?

Is that the idea?

 

[awshoot]

I don't like what Youtube is doing but my libertarian bent makes me think that they should be allowed to do so, as a non-government/public entity. Our choice to patronize their platform is ours to make. There are other competing platforms but they just haven't caught on in the mainstream yet. It was a risky bet for those who depended on Youtube for substantial income. Fortunately some have figured out how to compensate for the loss of youtube income (albeit many are begging on Patreon).

You sound like a modern Democrat -- I'm not trying to be insulting but when we see this type of corporate censorship, Democrats take up that Libertarian line.

What made these companies giants? Public infrastructure -- the internet began life as a military project, expanded to the universities, and then spread throughout the nation on the public communications infrastructure. It bought itself laws protecting it from things its users posted. Big tech continues to work hand in hand with the CIA, FBI, and military as a private contractors deriving sustaining revenue.

I would agree with the "it's a private entity and can do whatever" argument IF they got there without government help (meaning us, the people -- "we the people" spending our tax dollars). Now they are insanely influential -- big tech constitutes a 4th unelected branch of government and it is not wielding that power in a democratic fashion.

 

[Rickenbacher39]

I've yet to understand how 'social media' can influence voters.

They, it, what have you, can't change my political view one iota.

Twits, utubers, etc. can bang on all they care to, they couldn't possibly convince me to go commie.

So, are younger folk so malleable they have no conviction so can be swayed like a flag in the breeze?

Is that the idea?

You have learned well Grasshopper.

 

[Talos32]

I don't like what Youtube is doing but my libertarian bent makes me think that they should be allowed to do so, as a non-government/public entity. Our choice to patronize their platform is ours to make. There are other competing platforms but they just haven't caught on in the mainstream yet. It was a risky bet for those who depended on Youtube for substantial income. Fortunately some have figured out how to compensate for the loss of youtube income (albeit many are begging on Patreon).

I think the issue isn't so much that as a private entity people they shouldn't be allowed editorial control over their content, it's that under law they enjoy almost unlimited immunity from any sort of accountability for said content- way beyond that of a traditional news organization or a traditional vendor.

As an example, the crowdfunding site Kickstarter received multiple warnings that a campaign posted there was a potential fraud- the creator already had a judgment against him, and the plaintiff in that suit had notified everyone that they would be seizing the proceeds from the project if Kickstarter didn't take it down. The project raised $0.5M dollars which were all seized (minus Kickstarters fees of course). A traditional vendor might have been able to be sued by backers for being complicit in the fraud by not ending the campaign after it knew, but the Communications Decency Act gave Kickstarter almost absolute immunity. We're seeing similar issues with trying to hold Amazon accountable when "partner vendors" sell counterfeits. I believe they finally ruled that when fulfilled by Amazon they are accountable- but it took years.

The Communications Decency Act was based on the theory that since these websites were allowing anyone to post there, it would be impossible for them to police all of the content, so they made it to where you couldn't sue an online forum because a user posted something illegal or defamatory.

Fast forward 20 years, and these businesses have now built this immunity into their business model as a competitive advantage over traditional businesses but are still exerting broad editorial control. I would say that if YouTube has the time to demonetize content that they don't like, perhaps they have the time to remove content that would open a traditional publisher to lawsuits. You shouldn't be able to have it both ways.

 

[MannyGlocks]

Rick39,

Thank you Master!

 

[titsonritz]

I've yet to understand how 'social media' can influence voters.

They, it, what have you, can't change my political view one iota.

Twits, utubers, etc. can bang on all they care to, they couldn't possibly convince me to go commie.

So, are younger folk so malleable they have no conviction so can be swayed like a flag in the breeze?

Is that the idea?

It's not about YOU.
Minds are a lot like parachutes, they only work when they are open.

 

[MannyGlocks]

tsr,

Please, elaborate.

Are you saying my mind is not open or...?

Thanks!

 

[arakboss]

You sound like a modern Democrat -- I'm not trying to be insulting but when we see this type of corporate censorship, Democrats take up that Libertarian line.

What made these companies giants? Public infrastructure -- the internet began life as a military project, expanded to the universities, and then spread throughout the nation on the public communications infrastructure. It bought itself laws protecting it from things its users posted. Big tech continues to work hand in hand with the CIA, FBI, and military as a private contractors deriving sustaining revenue.

I would agree with the "it's a private entity and can do whatever" argument IF they got there without government help (meaning us, the people -- "we the people" spending our tax dollars). Now they are insanely influential -- big tech constitutes a 4th unelected branch of government and it is not wielding that power in a democratic fashion.

If we subject companies that use the internet to aid/build their businesses to free speech requirements, there is going to be a long line of companies in non-compliance

 

[User 1234]

Watch the videos of college students listening to an old Obama quote and then regurgitating their professors' dogma about white supremacy and racism, until they find out who said it.

At UCLA an interviewer asked students whether right wing students should be sent to re-education camps to help them learn to appreciate diversity, and all of them agreed. So yes, these are the voters who will believe whatever FB, Yahoo, Twitter and CNN tell them to.

 

[CamoDeafie]

A great number of today's youth have been indoctrinated(spelling?) Into believing what the State governments, some of the Federal agencies, and the majority of the media outlets, along with social media are telling them.

And how many of these people were also subject to being pushed into social groups such as youth groups, scout programs, adventure camps, summer camp programs, and the like, where the overarching theme was basically "do what we tell you to do, have fun how we tell you to have fun, and listen to your coaches, teachers, media"?

It may be directly attributed to the concept of "tv and teachers as babysitters"

 

[MxOverkill]

I've yet to understand how 'social media' can influence voters.

The very same way ads on traditional media platforms influence voters. Hundreds of millions of dollars would not be spent on ads if it didn't work.

Social media's strength (and weakness) is fake stuff is easy to plant and then gets widely disseminated like a virus. Last election, you had otherwise intelligent people actually believing the Pope endorsed Trump. Really truly.

 

[Mikej]

I've yet to understand how 'social media' can influence voters.

They, it, what have you, can't change my political view one iota.

Twits, utubers, etc. can bang on all they care to, they couldn't possibly convince me to go commie.

So, are younger folk so malleable they have no conviction so can be swayed like a flag in the breeze?

Is that the idea?

I believe they are. I feel like I've had a, somewhat, rare talent since I was in my late 20s. I "think" its much rarer now among younger people. That talent is not taking anything I hear/read to be the pure truth. I always question anything that sounds fantastical, over the top, plain crazy. There's way too many times I hear fantastical stories from people that are a parroting of some "Blip" I heard on the news/media. Frinstance....."Donald Trump is a racist". When you look deeper you find out someone said that Donald Trump was racist. That story goes out and people repeat "Donald Trump is racist". There you have it. Donald Trump is racist! I find it kind of funny that when the man himself is asked if he's racist? He says NO. Why won't the media, and people read/hear that and say.... "Whew, sure glad to hear Donald Trump is not a racist after all!"