I think it is rather ridiculous to argue about the issue unless we have seen the videos in question. Let us examine some scenarios of possible videos.

Person thanking God at graduation- I would not consider this offensive or hate speech at all. This is coming from someone who is very liberal. People should have a right to express their religious views, just so long as they are not trying to force them on people. I think any reasonable person would agree with this, and I doubt such a video would be removed. If they have the courage to show their religion in public, then more power to them.

KKK or Neo Nazi speech - I am pretty sure this would get banned as hate speech, and rightly so. People should have a right to say what they want, but considering that youtube caters to a younger and less mature demographic, this is probably not at all appropriate. It should also be considered that as a publicly traded company, Google, who owns youtube, would be less than thrilled about accusations that they host such material.

Anti-homosexual (ex. Westboro Baptist) hate speech - Before the conservatives tear me a new one about this, they should consider the fact that this is a controversial issue these days, and people's views tend be pretty loaded. I would not mention if it were not a hot-button issue, but it is, and such material is common. If you don't agree with their lifestyle, fine, nothing wrong with that, but don't go spreading hatred (ex. God created AIDS to send gays to hell). Such material is certainly hateful in nature, and does not belong in a place where people browse for humorous videos to lighten up there day.

Jihadist Material - Advocating the slaughter of innocent people for religious reasons - yeah, 'nuff said here. Definitely hate material.

Anne Coulter's recent statement that the Jews should convert to Christianity to become perfect - Sounds pretty bigoted to me. I don't think I would appreciate it at all if I were Jewish. Likewise, I don't think Christians would appreciate extremist Muslims telling them that they need to convert to Islam, as Osama bin Laden (or his impostor) recently suggested. Should it be removed? That's debatable. Some people like to have record of all the times Anne the Man shoots herself in the foot.

I am not a big fan of censorship, but some stuff is pretty volatile and hateful, and if I were a media provider, I would not want it on my network. I wouldn't want to be a responsible for spreading such filth.

You have to consider that Google is publicly traded, and hate speech looks very bad for the reputation of the company. Likewise, a significant portion of their audience is young, and they don't want to be a portal to hateful material for young people.

Youtube is not a "common carrier," and they have company rules of ethics that they follow, for good reasons. It is well within their right to remove videos if they want to. If you don't like it, host somewhere else.

[edit on 12-10-2007 by erkokite]

I just want to throw this out there, because I was thinking about this on the vanpool home from work today...

We were listening to AM talk radio, and they started talking about conservatives vs liberals. Our driver turned it off saying "I don't want to listen to this". At first I was like, crap I was listening to that. But then I thought about it for a second, and it dawned on me that what they were doing (attacking each other) was only pissing me off. Not in a good way, like when you don't agree with something you try to change it.

To get to the point, it really seems to me that there is a conscious effort being made to divide Americans into two groups and make it an "us vs them" situation. Where naturally in a two party system, you will have opposing ideals, it seems like it is becoming more than just differing ideas, each side seems to be getting more extreme and radiacal. Instead of working to find solutions that consider both sides of the spectrum, it seems each side will settle for nothing less than absolute dominance. Each party takes a particular issue or situation and makes it out to be like "your either with us or against us" as if there are no gray areas anymore. Someone, or some group, is successfully dividing our country with politics. Possibly setting the stage for themselves to come in and take over once everything spins completely out of control.

Just a thought I had while gridlocked in Atlanta this afternoon. When I saw this thread, it seemed relevent.

I think I would be a bit more worried about my own government, who is supposed to uphold the rights of free speech and free assembly, herding me into "free speech zones," or arresting me because of my political beliefs. Getting banned from youtube is pretty small potatoes by comparison.

Originally posted by Copernicus
Its ridiculous to me to censor youtube when you have Fox News spewing out hate and government propaganda on the regular TV. How about stopping that first?

First of all Fox News is NOT regular TV, its NOT broadcast over the airwaves like your liberal biased nightly news on ABC, NBC and CBS.
Secondly, what hate are you talking about? Fox News is fair and balanced. They always have a conservative and a liberal on giving both points of view unlike CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS and NBC news. Since Fox News kicks the butts of CNN and MSNBC in the ratings, I guess you are in the minority.

Back to Google:
The OP is correct and right on point.
The owners of Google are known to be liberal extremists and are doing exactly what they accuse the 'other' side of doing. Bunch of liberal hypocrites.
Having said that, I don't have a problem with them doing it because it is a private business and its their right to do so. I would not want the government telling me how to run my business. I feel the same way about conservative talk radio. The Democrats want to force their view down peoples throats via the Fairness Doctrine and it should be stopped.

[edit on 12-10-2007 by 4thDoctorWhoFan]

You right wingers oppose the term hate speech because you indulge in it all the time and then blame us liberals. Its called projection. You accuse others of what you do all the time.

But it doesn't wash. You will defend the foulest speech under the guise of first amendment rights... if its a conservative doing it.

Originally posted by grover
You right wingers oppose the term hate speech because you indulge in it all the time and then blame us liberals. Its called projection. You accuse others of what you do all the time.

But it doesn't wash. You will defend the foulest speech under the guise of first amendment rights... if its a conservative doing it.

Grover, you are completely wrong. I think it is you who are projecting.

And what are you talking about when you say that conservatives blame you liberals? Blame you for what? For trying to selectively curtail speech you do not find appropriate? Of course we blame you liberals because it is only politically correct liberals who come up with concepts like Hate Speech.

I have never known one conservative argue that only conservative viewpoints should be defended. In fact, it is always the exact opposite. Soldiers often say that they disagree with liberal viewpoints but that they will die fighting your right to speak them.

As for YouTube I think it is more than just a matter of them censoring their site. I think it is far worse. By allowing users to label videos as Hate Speech they are in essence giving you a free reign to slander somebody.

I think calling something Hate Speech is a form of Hate Speech.

Originally posted by CreeWolf

My intention to starting this thread was to help you understand that FREEDOM OF SPEECH is becoming an endangered species in the nation who champions it.

Oh, you mean like the 'free speech' zones that people are herded into when their opinion doesn't match the PTB? This is proof positive that free speech is under attack.

Incredible. Four pages and nobody has actually addressed the issue of what exactly was posted that YouTube, a private entity not unlike ATS, considered an infringement of it's terms and conditions of use.

Instead all I read is partisan bickering.

Speaking of youtube, I recently noticed that japanese videos are taking over.

"Youtube" should really switch its name to "Japtube".

Originally posted by TheoOne
"Youtube" should really switch its name to "Japtube".

Theo,

For so many reasons, you're a Viking!

Reply to Thewalkingfox

I am not worried about a privately-owned company setting its own standards for material contained on its servers.

I couldn't agree more.
_______________________________________________________________

Now with that said, how many of you have ever lived in a communist/socialist country?

You cry about hate speech, liberal Vs conservative, but haven't a clue what can and does happen everyday in countries that censor what is printed, broadcast or spoken. Say anything that the gov thinks is derogatory or hateful and your either shut-up or taken away.

Now the US gov censors via the media what you hear, read and see and they have "hate speech" legislation trying to dictate what you can say. Next thing you know you will be sent to a re-education center to learn proper thinking and speaking. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are all but null and void thanks to HR6166.

While we squabble about hate speech and whether YouTube can pull a video, we have already been sold out. As both sides point their fingers at each other they forget that three fingers are pointing back at themselves. We all have been frogs in a pot and getting cooked without even knowing it. Either we jump out of the pot now or its the diner plate for us.

John Q. Public doesn't care as long as he gets his bowl of gruel. If your a member of ATS and try to inform him, then he thinks your a nut. To him all this hate speech thing is a good idea.

Sorry for getting a little off topic

Originally posted by jjohns
The reason it's a sham is because it's always one sided. You don't see any liberal crying about the outrageous statements of Al Sharpton, Louis Farrakhan, or any of the countless mullahs in mosques here in the U.S. calling for the destruction of America.

And what about Kent State professor Julio Pino's anti-American jihadist website? Why were are the liberals either silent, or defending Pino's right to free speech when it was discovered that he was calling for a jihad against America, all funded with tax-dollars from Kent St.?

First of all, care to back any of this nonsense up with something? Maybe if you got your opinions of liberals from anywhere but Fox News you could be taken seriously. I have both parties in my extended familiy and they both think that Sharpton is a race-baiting, doubletalking douchebag who's more of a shuckin' and jivin' entertainer then a serious activist. The only difference is that the conservatives also think that liberals like him.

Their opinion's of Farrakhan and Pino are the same too...
they should be executed.

Give me a break. Even Ray Charles could see through what's behind the whole "hate speech" issue.

Oh man, you should've told me to put on my laughing hat and strap in. It's gonna take me a few days to recover from that gem. It's cause he's blind right? HAHAHAHA! Boy, that's funny, you're funny.

Originally posted by CreeWolf
If your sponsors and audience isn't there........well, thats called "Capitalism".

I wish it worked that way, but it doesn't. Special interest groups have put much tighter controls on entertainment than the government. I'm not even sure why it works, but it does. I'm working today, so I don't have time to think about this too much.

Here, brainstorm with this, I'll be back later...

Peoples feelings get hurt
Internet spamming makes the offended parties seem exponentially larger
Threats of boycott
Sponsor's bailing out

Originally posted by dntwastetime
Now where in els name did I get involved or have anything at all to do with this load of garbage you spewed ? READ THE POSTS I MADE IT IS CRYSTAL CLEAR WHAT I SAID.

Every time someone smack caps lock, a midget grows an inch. You, sir, have turned Weng Weng into Yao Ming

Yes, it is clear from your post that you believe the removal of this video from youtube, and the inclusion of "hate speech" as a possible reason for its removal, infringes on freedom of speech.
The problem with this idea is that freedom of speech was never promised by YouTube in the first place, and as a private organization, are under no legal requirement to provide it

Getting up in arms over YouTube "denying free speech" to any degree just makes a person look very silly.

So its time to get disrespectful I see...my turn to laugh ..Wow!!! your sooo smart, and witty.Im really impressed with your vast knowledge, and oh how your remarks make me want to just go hide in a hole and absolutlyjusdye!!!!

Well, in my defense, it's difficult to respect someone who can't properly space their punctuation. I'm not out to impress you, but I'm flattered anyway.

I agree with about your hate speech zone enforcement thats Bull .Yes, I do like to use and abuse my freedom of speech its called being a American.

Feel free to use and abuse it all you want. Just don't expect your abuse of it to have zero consequences. Ever heard of libel, slander, and incitement? If you think you're grown up enough to throw whatever words you want at whoever you want, whenever you want, I'm certain you're grown up enough to accept that sometimes, you're going to have to take the results of doing so.

I'm also an American. As such I figure it's something of an obligation to not be an incomprehensible raving lunatic who's vocabulary consists of expletives and ethnic slurs.

Stop twisting words ,I was commenting to you, not asking you to inform me of anything.I know exactly what hate crimes, and "Tacking on penaltys for hate"means, nothing!!! thats what,It is a carefully crafted way to incrementally boil the free speech frog.You just do a little hate speech punishment for this, and that, then its for the next ,then its execution by a nazi.you need to do a little history lesson about Totalitarian Dictatorships or gain a few years of knowledge then come back and we can talk.

The fact that you think the hate crimes bill is an infringement of free speech shows that you in fact don't know what you're talking about. We're not talking about opinions here, bud. Just bald fact - The bill increases the penalty for those criminals who, in addition to being found guilty of a crime, have also proven themselves to be dangerous to large groups of people. It's not punishment for speech, it's punishment for criminal action.

Execution by a Nazi, huh? No doubt a black gay liberal wiccan Nazi? I would advise you to not presume I'm clueless about totalitarianism simply because I actually know how a law you have a problem with actually works.

FYI This is a proven thing liars say "To be honest".You dont care about your freedom of speech?!!!WOW Im really done talking to you.By the way, your explination in the other thread was passed over I dont think I even looked at the thread again.I already read the law,its bunk.Sorry I missed it.Im a little busy.

Is it, really? What do three to five exclamation points after a single sentence usually mean about the writer?

Oh, I care very much about my freedom of speech. I simply recognize that there are larger threats to it than the make-believe crap you're going on about.

I worry about people getting electrocuted and hosed with chemical weapons when seeking redress from their government. I worry about being thrown in prison without charge for asking a cop why I got pulled over.

You worry about people getting an extra couple thousand bucks on their vandalism charges because they only targeted synagogues. You worry about someone's video being pulled of of YouTube.

To each his own, I suppose.

[edit on 13-10-2007 by TheWalkingFox]

[edit on 13-10-2007 by TheWalkingFox]