It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

YouTube to ban 'hateful, and 'supremacist' videos

page: 6
25
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: AScrubWhoDied

So In the Jim Crow south

As long as I can show police arrested one white man, and not every black man, it must mean there was no bias?

What a joke




posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 10:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: dug88

It's a shame that corporations are denying a platform of free speech to those they disagree with.

But censorship is the tool of cowards and tyrants.

We just don't know which one Youtube is yet.





Doesn't ATS ban people for posting white supremist stuff?


The work around is to post Anti-White Supremacist stuff.



This country has rights for everyone right now.

You have the right to say whatever you want, but you don't always get the venue of your choice. Such is the world.

White supremists and the extreme left (trans, feminists, take your pick ect.) are fighting for equity, not equality.

Both parties have whored out sentient beings for establishments. Reap what they sow and all of that.

Anyone still with either side is supporting what they fight.


On the contrary. To post White Supremacist stuff you basically have to build your own venue, meanwhile, at the Legion of Doom, they figured out that leftists get off on Anti-White Supremacist content, not to mention rabid hypocrisy, so now that is en vogue and widespread en masse whatever.

Isnt "progress" the shizzy?!


Should we regulate it or let the free market do so?

Shi# or get off the pot. I am for all speech, but you're right about hypocrisy deserving to reap what they sow. I suppose I'm just torn on gambling to let it play out in everyone's favor, or the opposite. Then again I'm very involved while others bitch from a place of apathy (the politically uninvolved) . At the end of the day, trouble is getting caught. And I have my liberty one way or the other 😉

Edit: added throughout for (attempted) clarity.
edit on 5-6-2019 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Grambler

Don't be koy, let's do it man.



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 10:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: AScrubWhoDied

So In the Jim Crow south

As long as I can show police arrested one white man, and not every black man, it must mean there was no bias?

What a joke


Nah, but you got data to show number of blacks vs whites arrested and you have historical context.

Now produce the data that show any platform bans one political leaning more than the next.

I'll wait.

It's clear, violate the rules, get banned. YOU haven't been banned because you haven't.

Go ahead, try it out: Break their TOS and see what happens.




edit on 5-6-2019 by AScrubWhoDied because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 10:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: AScrubWhoDied

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: AScrubWhoDied

So In the Jim Crow south

As long as I can show police arrested one white man, and not every black man, it must mean there was no bias?

What a joke


Nah, but you got data to show number of blacks vs whites arrested and you have historical context.

Now produce the data that show any platform bans one political leaning more than the next.

I'll wait.






My results make it difficult to take claims of political neutrality seriously. Of 22 prominent, politically active individuals who are known to have been suspended since 2005 and who expressed a preference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, 21 supported Donald Trump.


quillette.com...

It’s just obvious to all watching



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 10:17 PM
link   
a reply to: AScrubWhoDied

How would you recommend I violate the rules?

Call someones mouth Putin’s c holster?

Tell conservatives to assault democrats with beverages?

Make a video showing a liberal being shot?

Dox and spread edited footage to smear liberal teenagers?

Oh that’s right, when it’s reversed and liberals do that it’s magical it against their policy



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 10:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: AScrubWhoDied

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: AScrubWhoDied

So In the Jim Crow south

As long as I can show police arrested one white man, and not every black man, it must mean there was no bias?

What a joke


Nah, but you got data to show number of blacks vs whites arrested and you have historical context.

Now produce the data that show any platform bans one political leaning more than the next.

I'll wait.






My results make it difficult to take claims of political neutrality seriously. Of 22 prominent, politically active individuals who are known to have been suspended since 2005 and who expressed a preference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, 21 supported Donald Trump.


quillette.com...

It’s just obvious to all watching




From your source:



I began my analysis by compiling a list of every prominent individual or political party known to have been banned from Twitter since its founding. As a proxy for prominence, I used the criterion of whether the ban was important enough to warrant coverage in mainstream news sources.




Not everyone is convinced. A June, 2018 Pew poll found that 72% of Americans believe that social media companies censor views they don’t like, with members of the public being four times more likely to report a belief that such institutions favor liberals over conservatives than the opposite. Podcasters Joe Rogan and Sam Harris both received backlash from their respective audiences for not pressing Dorsey hard enough on the censorship issue.



Another:



Of course, the existence of this disparity does not prove that Twitter is actively discriminating against Trump supporters. Perhaps conservatives are simply more likely to violate neutral rules regarding harassment and hate speech. In such case, the observed data would not serve to impugn Twitter, but rather conservatives themselves.


Lastly:



I found it difficult to establish the extent to which any of the suspended individuals or groups clearly supported Republicans over Democrats or vice versa. Classifying them along the left-right axis is also problematic, as there are some figures that neither side would be eager to claim. Most prominent individuals who were suspended did express a preference in the 2016 election, however.



The only thing is clear is your confirmation bias.



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 10:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: AScrubWhoDied

How would you recommend I violate the rules?

Call someones mouth Putin’s c holster?

Tell conservatives to assault democrats with beverages?

Make a video showing a liberal being shot?

Dox and spread edited footage to smear liberal teenagers?

Oh that’s right, when it’s reversed and liberals do that it’s magical it against their policy


We talking about youtube targeting conservatives or what?
Looks like you grabbed a bunch of random things that people said that you didn't like, lets stay focused on youtube targeting conservatives for no reason other than them being conservative please.



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 10:27 PM
link   
An idempotent token on post will fix your double post issues ATS.
edit on 5-6-2019 by AScrubWhoDied because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 10:30 PM
link   
a reply to: AScrubWhoDied

No the only thing clear is that social media platforms are censoring conservative voices and using excuses and selective enforcement of their rules to do so

That is why I listed all the examples of main stream liberals saying or doing things that also would similarly violate rules and not getting banned

Of course you want to be ignore that



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: AScrubWhoDied

“Hate Group” SPLC Helping YouTube Purge Conservatives
www.thenewamerican.com...

Social Media Purges of Conservatives and Christians Spark Outcry
www.thenewamerican.com...

Media companies’ ‘impartial’ algorithms disproportionately impact conservative material.
www.nationalreview.com...



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Already found an alternative for Google browser in brave. Don't know if it's really any better but it doesn't say Google so at least I can pretend I'm moving away.

No more youtube it seems, will I be able to miss out on those fail videos though. That's the real test. Submitting to these idiots isn't even an option. No more values of mine will be sacrificed. No more bending for the weak that lie and deceive.



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 10:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: AScrubWhoDied

“Hate Group” SPLC Helping YouTube Purge Conservatives
www.thenewamerican.com...

Social Media Purges of Conservatives and Christians Spark Outcry
www.thenewamerican.com...

Media companies’ ‘impartial’ algorithms disproportionately impact conservative material.
www.nationalreview.com...



Not a single source of objective data or primary sources in either one of those opinions. Most of your sources quote themselves.

I really ought to stop being lazy and make a 'news' website for a segment of the population because you mother#ers eat this # up.



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 11:01 PM
link   
‘Hate’ and ‘supremacy’

So islam is banned ?

Good



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 11:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Breakthestreak
‘Hate’ and ‘supremacy’

So islam is banned ?

Good


Yup, they ban those extremists too, one of our members conveniently left that out of their source though.



posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 11:13 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Wait, you're still alive?




posted on Jun, 5 2019 @ 11:24 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I think the antidepressants started to work.



edit on 5-6-2019 by The GUT because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2019 @ 04:35 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

Naive much? Jones said when he was banned that it would open a flood gate. Look now!



posted on Jun, 6 2019 @ 04:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: muSSang
a reply to: ScepticScot

Naive much? Jones said when he was banned that it would open a flood gate. Look now!


I think the definition of naive is believing anything Jones says.



posted on Jun, 6 2019 @ 05:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: AScrubWhoDied

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: AScrubWhoDied

“Hate Group” SPLC Helping YouTube Purge Conservatives
www.thenewamerican.com...

Social Media Purges of Conservatives and Christians Spark Outcry
www.thenewamerican.com...

Media companies’ ‘impartial’ algorithms disproportionately impact conservative material.
www.nationalreview.com...



Not a single source of objective data or primary sources in either one of those opinions. Most of your sources quote themselves.

I really ought to stop being lazy and make a 'news' website for a segment of the population because you mother#ers eat this # up.


Such arrogance and smugness for someone who will ignore reality to cheer for the censorship of conservatives

You asked for evidence and received it

You ignore left wing people committing offenses and getting away with it

We get it you want conservatives censored

Not surprising as it’s clear you can’t even have a discussion without resorting to cursing and name calling yourself

Perhaps you should be censored using those words for violating this sites toc, though unlike you o will not cheer for censorship




top topics



 
25
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join