PayPal Bans Youtube Competitor BitChute

Censorship marches on. I am not a fan of Infowars but it appears there is a major effort to make sure they can no longer do business or at least that is being used as an excuse to attempt to wipe out a YouTube competitor.

This is a problem when you have monopolies. They control the flow of information and the ability to compete. For those who say there are alternatives to Google / Facebook / YouTube, there really is not as the big guys collude to wipe out the competition.

www.washingtontimes.com...

Video-sharing site BitChute cries foul after apparently being banned from PayPal

In a statement, BitChute founder Ray Vahey said that he was notified by PayPal that he can no longer use the video service’s account to accept or send funds, effective immediately.

“BitChute has had a Paypal account since 2016, we have used it to settle payments and to receive subscription payments from supporters along with other discretionary payments,” said Mr. Vahey. “It’s our belief that it is our stand against the current trend in censorship that has resulted in this action.”

Launched in Jan. 2017, Mr. Vahey said at the time that BitChute was the product of “increased levels of censorship by the large social media platforms,” such as banning users, demonetizing their videos and “tweaking algorithms to send certain content into obscurity.”

“BitChute is politically neutral and we have a diverse community in interests and backgrounds,” Mr. Vahey said Wednesday. “We require that users only upload legal content that complies with our terms and community guidelines. We carry out moderation to remove all content that breaches our terms and community guidelines, including but not limited to videos from terrorists, child abuse or pirated video.”

“BitChute is pro-free expression which is a universal human right,” he added. “Furthermore, censorship and deplatforming are poor ways to tackle societal problems as they merely create echo chambers that can lead to bigger problems in the long run. It’s important to platform all idea’s as this exposes them to immediate opposition and allows for a public deconstruction of any flaws they may contain. If you are against bigotry or racism or hateful ideologies, you should be pro-free expression.”

Once again, we see that we are entitled to Free Speech.....as long as we're saying what they want to hear.

Google and PayPal are very tight knit companies who work together, probably even some shared ownership. Why in the blue hell would they want a competitor to utilize their services? This isn't censorship, it's business.

originally posted by: LordAhriman
Google and PayPal are very tight knit companies who work together, probably even some shared ownership.

This is Google's Board of Directors and this is PayPal's, there is no crossover.

You can't be an open content site free of copyright consequences and yet ban whatever you don't like or agree with.

a reply to: jjkenobi


How is PayPal an open content site?

I'm been thinking lately that antitrust lawsuits may be the best way to handle these Silicon Valley megacorps. They are clearly operating as monopolies, and it would be easy to show that their actions are harming the general public -- squeezing out competitors, censoring based on politics, and because of that threatening our ability to hold fair elections.

And before anyone mentions it: Having a monopoly doesn't mean you're the only game in town. It means you are the dominant player, such that nobody else offers major competition.

a reply to: infolurker

PayPal doesn't give any reason why they are doing this?

I grow tired of these heavy handed attempts of demonetizing people for their viewpoints. What PayPal standards are they violating?

a reply to: LordAhriman

No antitrust committee is going to agree with this reasoning. See: Bell telephone company being split up.

Double post. Sorry.

This is just getting ridiculous.

I'm your 3rd flag yet this has been up a few hours at least. Not a good sign.

Guys flag this thread please.
Thanks!

a reply to: infolurker

The thread title itself says competitor.

Should Pepsi fountains offer Coke and vise versa?

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: infolurker

The thread title itself says competitor.

Should Pepsi fountains offer Coke and vise versa?

No, but Visa and Master card should not be allowed to ban credit card payments for Coke in the grocery store.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: infolurker

The thread title itself says competitor.

Should Pepsi fountains offer Coke and vise versa?

Bitchute is not a competitor to Paypal.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

You’d think PayPal being a business would want all the revenue it could get from all and any transactions. Instead they are effectively turning away business at a cost to themselves.It seems these big silicone valley corporations are modelling themselves on China’s authoritarian heavily censored internet...

a reply to: CriticalStinker

What’s YouTube got to do with PayPal? I didn’t realise there was any shared interests.

link

originally posted by: surfer_soul
a reply to: CriticalStinker

What’s YouTube got to do with PayPal? I didn’t realise there was any shared interests.

Once integration is completed this year, PayPal users who authorize a payment in any one Google service won't need to log in again to make future transactions in the entire Google ecosystem. U.S. users will then be able to select PayPal as a quick option at checkout, including on peer-to-peer payment platforms like Google Pay.

The additional functionality builds on an existing relationship between PayPal and Google that lets consumers make payments at stores, on websites, in mobile apps and through the Chrome mobile browser.

link

So they are not the same entity but they do have an existing partnership and I'm not familiar with the terms shared between the two.

That said, does PayPal not have the right as a company to decide who uses their platform?

If they deem it as threatening to their image can they not decide to ask them to use a different payment service?

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Interesting I wasn’t aware of any partnership between google and PayPal. I like the way the article terms it a google ecosystem, that’s a nice term for google to use if it feels threatened at all. Much better than a monopoly which it really is.

As to your question I’m sure they do have that right, but as a business it is in their interests to not turn down business. Unless they have deemed it less profitable because of damages to their image. Which is unlikely frankly. Bitchute like YouTube is just a video hosting site not a content creator. I think you were right in your first post this is Google’s attempt via PayPal to suppress competition.

a reply to: surfer_soul

Interesting I wasn’t aware of any partnership between google and PayPal. I like the way the article terms it a google ecosystem, that’s a nice term for google to use if it feels threatened at all. Much better than a monopoly which it really is.

Agreed, and frankly I think it has gotten out of hand. Frankly they have too much pull with the government, and I wouldn't be surprised if they do favors for immunity from small offenses others would have the book thrown at them for.

More scary is that Amazon won a bid to host a cloud service for the Pentagon. And we wonder why if you search "Amazon (anything negative)" you'll get a slue of results. (Edit: they haven't won yet but are favored as it stands, oracle is out as of a day ago)

As to your question I’m sure they do have that right, but as a business it is in their interests to not turn down business. Unless they have deemed it less profitable because of damages to their image. Which is unlikely frankly. Bitchute like YouTube is just a video hosting site not a content creator. I think you were right in your first post this is Google’s attempt via PayPal to suppress competition.

Honestly, I agree. It was more that they were hedging competition, and honestly I wouldn't be surprised if they were hitting two birds with one stone and doing things from and ideological stand point.

I do say we need reform, and while I don't agree with their actions, at this point I don't see what can be done.