YouTube Says It Will Now Crack Down On Abortion-Related ‘Misinformation’

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Such as? Give me a few prime examples.
If you go off about vaccines or ivermectin nonsense then I'll just ignore it. Like beating a dead horse at this point.

YouTube isn't in the game of letting unfettered free speech run a muck on their platform, and they have never said anything about it being a free speech platform either, they're a platform for content crewtors to share their creative content within the guidelines they have.

Private company's being successful at what they do bothers people like you tho for some reason.

a reply to: Klassified

...internal conflict...

That's so true on so many levels. Including myself personally.

Continuing to use YT as the example, they don't have the medical expertise to judge the quality of information and/or advice that could be posted. I doubt very much they want to expend their resources to hire those who do have the expertise. The best they could probably do -- if they did choose to allow such content -- is to post a general disclaimer for viewers. I'm not even sure what that would look like except to cover their own tails.

I also doubt they want the civil/criminal liabilities that would no doubt result, either from the potential health issues suffered by anyone who followed posted content, or from prosecutors in states that restrict/ban abortions.

At what point are people responsible for the actions of others? At what point is it okay to deny people that responsibility for their decisions? And at what point is it appropriate to exert power over others and their decisions?

Especially in the so-called land of the free...

a reply to: Boadicea

At what point are people responsible for the actions of others? At what point is it okay to deny people that responsibility for their decisions? And at what point is it appropriate to exert power over others and their decisions?

Especially in the so-called land of the free...

Exactly.

a reply to: strongfp

There's YEARS of examples on every media outlet and social media platform lmao

I'm not spoon feeding your ass you know damn good and well

🤣🤣🤡🙈

Private company's being successful at what they do bothers people like you tho for some reason.

Lmaooo......God you're one of the most disingenuous posters on this forum

I can't tell if you're a troll or you're a dyed in the wool believer anymore

Maybe both

a reply to: strongfp

Private little Fiefdoms with Boards of Dictators 😁

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Classic: "do your own research bro"

Kinda like this guy:

youtube.com...

Who makes videos on a regular basis about how black people aren't even people?

James Dancey, sargon of akkad, turning point, Candice Owen's, Thomas Sowell? ATSs own normal america channel?

I assume you think "breadtube" has this left wing monopoly on YouTube, when they don't. Learn to use the platform perhaps?

a reply to: xuenchen

No kidding. Techno - feudalism, under the kingdom of Google.

a reply to: optimisticcontrarian

Are you blind?

I just have you more than a few examples of people who go against what you think is hindering free speech on YouTube.

The burden of proof is on YOU if you make such a bold claim. I need the facts in this case, since apparently there's so much of it around it shouldn't be an issue to dig up quickly.

a reply to: optimisticcontrarian

You beat me to it..........that pretty much sums it up

But just like his post after it's like playing cards w a monkey they just throw their poop everywhere and scream like they've won

a reply to: optimisticcontrarian

Social media is a broad spectrum. We are talking about YouTube. You're now moving goal posts.

And I just gave you a few very right leaning youtubers who get their point across without sounding like an insane schizo.

a reply to: Klassified

Twitter will be going after the word Goo word it wont be long before YT starts as well.

a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Where's your examples? Give me some examples and I'll concede, again keep the vaccines out of it. Because I know youtube is very sensitive on covid related stuff.

Go on, I'll wait. This thread isn't going where.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Where's your examples? Give me some examples and I'll concede, again keep the vaccines out of it. Because I know youtube is very sensitive on covid related stuff.

Go on, I'll wait. This thread isn't going where.

Weve already TOLD you of examples and that there are plenty of people who were banned and removed from social media platforms for not pushing the narrative

INCLUDING Youtube, people have to be careful not to use the wrong KEY WORDS in their podcasts so they dont get removed, its the reason Joe Rogan even moved from youtube

Give us a fkn break dude youre so full of it

a reply to: optimisticcontrarian

Calm down.

Now, about those examples... I'm waiting.

History debunks Simon made a video about 13 / 50, and didn't get canceled, Thomas Sowell channel is filled with conservative talking points and isn't canceled.

Ever read the YouTube comments? They're more free speech than here on ATS. Go figure...

So, where should I be aiming the football next?

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: Klassified

I don't see what the issue is here,

Yes, you (and a few others) have demonstrated your ignorance about such things countless times, we all know...

they are cracking down on content on how to perform back alley abortions

This is the hook (pun intended)... the slippery slope...

and other nonsense.

This is the kitchen sink that they were really and actually targeting.

They lead with something that no one - not even me - can argue with (well, I can, but I also agree that there should be some kind of restriction on it), then casually include this blanket generic 'and other nonsense' that allows them to also ban the content they really and actually wanted to ban, like information that the jabs are far more dangerous than they have been claiming, that there has been ZERO safety trials when they falsely claimed otherwise, that HCQ and Ivermectin are dangerous when the not only are they the exact opposite, they are actually far more effective against the virus than the expensive and deadly new drug they want to sell that also assisted in or or was the outright tool used in the murder of many thousands of the people they claim the virus killed - oh, and lets not forget that if JCQ and Ivermectin were used, they would not have been able to get their EUA for their dangerous and untested new gene therapies.