Difference between revisions of "YouTube"
|Line 41:||Line 41:|
Revision as of 14:48, 13 June 2019
Examples of Intolerance
Some examples include:5 items
- Legal Insurrection got censored because they showed how Palestinian children are exploited for the cameras. Note the same standard does not apply to claims against Israel (as many others had shown those videos without getting banned). 
- PragerU's was suppressed/censored (silently), with no evidence offered that anything they have said it wrong, untrue, or racist. They do expose misleading beliefs of the far left, so that appears reasonable to block or punish them. 
- YouTube went on a crusade against guns, first you couldn't sell guns, then promote guns, and so on. They terminated gun parts channels, like Brownells. They're inventing laws and changing terms that are against the spirit of our constitution. 
- As part of an NYT Expose by Project Veritas (James O'keefe), they caught the NYT editor Nick Dudich explaining how he was using friendships and coordination with YouTube (Earnest Pettie) to manipulate social media to intentionally influence the news.  YouTube was being a tool of evil, to work against a free election.
Every company has a right to decide who they support or not. But the problem is Google/YouTube PRETENDS to be an open platform (and community service). Yet, they're not doing what they advertise. If they openly admitted in their policies that they're a left-of-center advocacy site that will censor center/right positions at will, then at least that would be honest.
More than that, they keep changing the rules after people have built their business on assumptions that if they're approved today, that these places won't be asshats and suddenly change the rules tomorrow. But that's not how Google/YouTube works -- fuck you all, we changed the rules for arbitrary reasons and broke your business, pray we don't change the rules again. It's the complete lack of clarity, forethought, advance notice, and arbitrariness that make them unreliable business partners. They are the next Quark.
The Government has already decided that if you're open to the public business, you should NOT have the right to discriminate (based on race, gender, disability, sexual preference)... sad that we have to extend this to political/ideological affiliation. As this should be obvious that in a free society, good people don't try to shout down or gag others: they ignore, or let them have their piece and then decimate them with reason, not the club of censorship.
Because of YouTube's anti-gun and anti-Free Speech positions, there have been some alternatives outlets created to be American versions of YouTube (instead of fascist ones that censor views they don't like): 4 items