Politics & News

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Was youtube right to remove the controversial video featuring Joe Roagan...

Where he talks to a scientific guy who links all the pro vaccers to "mass psychosis"?

Although this is perhaps not technically "deplatforming" (Joe Roagan is still on YouTube), it could be argued that the response of YouTube is still the censorship of ideas that might trouble the hive mind.

But it's worse. First they get to blanket ban problematic people entirely....

... But now they've got away with that, they know they can get away with cherry picking certain propositions that are trouble. This leaves the rest of us with less data in order to determine our opinions. Essentially, it means our subjugation is more insidious.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

independentone · M

Their company, their rules, either abide by the TOS or find another site. You aren't being forced to use youtube or any other social media site, but if you do use them, you had to agree to their TOS when you joined.

1-25 of 46

Notanymore · 41-45, M

@independentone if that applied to every business, things would be horrid.

independentone · M

@Notanymore Why is that? Isn't it just a variation of "No Shirt, no shoes, no service"?

QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M

@Notanymore It essentially does. The proprietor doesn’t even need a reason to ask you to leave.

Notanymore · 41-45, M

@independentone what if a restuarant refused to hold parties for people of a certain ideology? What if ebay refused to sell anything relating to religious preference? What if a strip mall refused to rent to a liberal campaigning group, or an army recruiter? What if a cake maker refused to make a cake for a gay couple? What if a soup kitchen refused to serve a particular race?

Northwest · M

@Notanymore Try going to a restaurant without a shirt on.

Notanymore · 41-45, M

@Northwest try denying someone entry into a restuarant with a hilary shirt on.

independentone · M

@Notanymore Discrimination is different than having rules.

Notanymore · 41-45, M

@independentone .........

independentone · M

@Notanymore If you're implying that social media is discriminatory, you're just wrong, there are many liberals, conservatives, political, non-political, whites, blacks, brown, and every imaginable race all allowed to join and use social media, as long as you follow a few simple rules.
Not all conservatives have been banned.

Notanymore · 41-45, M

@independentone if rules are discriminatory against thoughts and ideas. That's discrimination.

QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M

@Notanymore

what if a restuarant refused to hold parties for people of a certain ideology?

That… is allowed. The ole “find another baker” scenario.

Notanymore · 41-45, M

@QuixoticSoul asked the cake maker that lost the lawsuit.

QuixoticSoul · 41-45, M

@Notanymore Don’t know about the lawsuit, but SCOTUS sided with the proprietor.

Northwest · M

@Notanymore

asked the cake maker that lost the lawsuit.

When did that happen?

This comment is hidden. Show Comment

Jm31xxx · 46-50, M

@independentone right so the question is, are they gonna ban Joe Roagan outright? And is being dubious about the response to Covid explicitly banned in their rules?

Would they have the balls to that? Joe's a big name and it would draw a lot of attention to something which to a lot of people are getting more and more concerned about.

independentone · M

@Jm31xxx They haven't banned him, they removed a video that was full of mis-information. Rogan broke the TOS rules and youtube removed a video. No big deal really.

Notanymore · 41-45, M

@independentone go censorship!

independentone · M

@Notanymore The baker stated his reasoning wrong, why did he have to say anything about gays, if you don't want to bake for a customer, just say you are too busy at the time and you can't fulfill their order.

Jm31xxx · 46-50, M

@independentone see, that right there is a bit ambiguous "misinformation". But who gets to determine that. Language seems to be evolving pretty quickly these days and seems to becoming more and more synonymous with "wrong think"

independentone · M

@Notanymore no censorship, you might want to look up the definition. Companies have the right to have rules, break them and pay the consequences.

independentone · M

@Jm31xxx Science, Doctors, CDC, quite a long list of educated people whose career has been medicine.

Jm31xxx · 46-50, M

@independentone as if there's a consensus among all those people

And anyway, from what I can determine "mass hysteria" indicates he was talking about the sociology aspect of this crisis. Sociology is concerned more humanities than science so who the fuck thinks they gets to police that? Post modern tyrants, that's who

Notanymore · 41-45, M

@independentone knock the companies have the right shit when it applies to your agenda dude

ElwoodBlues · M

@Notanymore

What if ebay refused to sell anything relating to ...

Ebay recently banned the selling of Nazi memorabilia, so that's already happened.

What if a strip mall refused to rent to a liberal campaigning group,

I would be shocked if things like that haven't already happened.

What if a cake maker refused to make a cake for a gay couple?

As you well know, SCOTUS upheld the right of the cake maker to refuse. The question is, would a social media platform also have the right to refuse to bake a facist cake?

1-25 of 46