I understand this perspective, but if this is how it's going to be, Youtube needs to be upfront and have clear policy that they don't allow or will suppress conservative or anything that may be contrary to the far left narrative.
-
-
that would be nice. but really difficult to pull off. so like the word "gypsy" is a very racist term. but Americans don't see it that way. "Gypsy" is a slur for the Roma people, which were believed to be from Egypt. it's directly parallel to calling a Hispanic person a "spic".
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
It would definitely be difficult but it would help youtubers if they had clearer guidelines. Right now it seems that they are intentionally vague so that they can maintain appearances as an open platform while quietly suppressing anything they don't like.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
well, it's hard to have those guidelines. how do you tell the difference between someone who actually believes what they're saying and someone who's just trying to provoke someone else?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @lukemburgess @KeeganFuhs and
do you think the Westboro Baptist Church actually believes the things they say? or is it more likely they're trying to provoke others into violence? i mean think about it "God hates you." that's the completely opposite message of the bible. do they actually believe that?pic.twitter.com/Y468tO79c6
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Well the guidelines could just say that neither is allowed. Of course no rules will cover every scenario, but the point I'm trying to make is that youtube has a pattern of suppressing conservatives who don't violate any of their rules and then denying that they are doing it.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
but they do. source: https://youtube.googleblog.com/2019/06/our-ongoing-work-to-tackle-hate.html …pic.twitter.com/PlCSOrzq7U
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
They do have guidelines. I'm talking about is the people who don't violate any of these rules who still have their content demonitized, removed from search results, or suppressed in some way. Ostensibly because of their political views because that is the only commonality.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
i need an example. but right off the bat, i'd guess removed or demonetized content that doesn't technically violate the rules are veiled attempts to provoke someone in one way or another.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
There's lots of examples, but recently I think the channel LouderwithCrowder is a clear example. He was demonetized and his videos removed, until winning a lawsuit and having them reinstated, despite no instances of breaking those guidelines.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
I'm watching Dice's video again now. Pretend you're a space alien and have absolutely no skin in the game...you're watching all this from a completely outside perspective. What I'm hearing is "ha ha ha, the president is listening to me, not you...i'm winning, you're losing."
-
-
Replying to @lukemburgess @KeeganFuhs and
doesn't that seem a bit childish?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 3 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.