YouTube banned a vegan dude who rescued pigeons and produced carefully worded content specifically designed not to violate their TOS. No reason given.
Ludicrous and proof of flagrant partisan censorship of conservatives.
RT if you think @TeamYouTube should restore his account.
Interesting, didn't know that. But don't you think the government is the wrong one since it's giving some benefits to the "wrong person"?
-
-
Maybe, but that’s the social contract we have. YouTube has some truly awful stuff on there (no fault of theirs), and they aren’t forced to spend money and time sitting through all of it anymore than the phone company is. If they want to play a new game, it comes with new rules.
-
I see... you do have a good argument.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Another problem is banning people without reason, or having extremely ambiguous and subjective reasons.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The thing is, YouTube benefits greatly from its legal status, think about what happens if someone uploaded child porn onto YouTube, then think about what would happen if YouTube was legally considered a publisher and then someone did that.
-
While the blame can go onto the government for giving these protections to the wrong people, YouTube wasn’t always the wrong person, YouTube for a while acted like a true platform, it’s only now that they are shifting away from that
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.