Youtube censorship time to allow embedded videos from other sites?

CinemaGuy45

Youtube is nothing of the kind anymore forget the YOU big media platforms have been given unfair advantage on Youtube.

Is it time video sharing sites like BitChute which works under peer to peer sharing was allowed to be embedded here?


We discuss current affairs here and Youtube is no longer fit for purpose in my opinion.

This video is banned on Youtube for example if you disagree with something post you counter argument censorship belongs in North Korea and China not Europe.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/H4W7FwBy0Ukh/

CinemaGuy45

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

Youtube is nothing of the kind anymore forget the YOU big media platforms have been given unfair advantage on Youtube.

Is it time video sharing sites like BitChute which works under peer to peer sharing was allowed to be embedded here?


We discuss current affairs here and Youtube is no longer fit for purpose in my opinion.

This video is banned on Youtube for example if you disagree with something post you counter argument censorship belongs in North Korea and China not Europe.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/H4W7FwBy0Ukh/

Since when are conspiracy theories and the con artists who peddle them current affairs?

If people are gullible enough to follow or believe them you have a platform.

CinemaGuy45

DubInMeath wrote: »

Since when are conspiracy theories and the con artists who peddle them current affairs?

If people are gullible enough to follow or believe them you have a platform.

Millions of videos on that site.

As regards conspiracy stuff if it can be debunked it is best to debunk it not ban it.

This is a good video from an Irish poster.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/O0fsg8ijn8E/

Blacktie.

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

Youtube is nothing of the kind anymore forget the YOU big media platforms have been given unfair advantage on Youtube.

Is it time video sharing sites like BitChute which works under peer to peer sharing was allowed to be embedded here?


We discuss current affairs here and Youtube is no longer fit for purpose in my opinion.

This video is banned on Youtube for example if you disagree with something post you counter argument censorship belongs in North Korea and China not Europe.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/H4W7FwBy0Ukh/

Isn't that the guy who believes the Royal family are lizard people

This is a good video from an Irish poster.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/O0fsg8ijn8E/

Always good for a laugh. I can summarise 90% of his videos to it's the immigrants fault.

TheRepentent

Bitchute...the site where the pondlife of YouTube go after getting banned.

CinemaGuy45

From their Trending section.


https://www.bitchute.com/video/DAxQk9pvJ0I/

CinemaGuy45

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

Millions of videos on that site.

As regards conspiracy stuff if it can be debunked it is best to debunk it not ban it.

This is a good video from an Irish poster.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/O0fsg8ijn8E/

Am aware of the site, it's popular enough with some posters on here, others have described it as breitbart for people who can't read.

I've no interest in it personally as I don't dislike anyone just because they are a particular religion or colour, and the other crazies on there are of no interest either apart from having to deal with the technical fall out from people who believe them, and thankfully anyone I know aren't stupid enough to not vaccinate their kids unless they can't be due to medical reasons.

super_furry

Bitchute is for flat-earthers and people who shouldn't be trusted with sharp pencils.

riclad

I think youtube is right to ban extremists and people who push conspiracys or fake news
. I looked at bitchute. I,m not impressed by any site that shows Alex Jones videos. There's a whole industry of people who post fake news and racist extreme right wing
content. It's not easy to get banned by youtube.

Kidchameleon

Did not know Boards will not allow BitChute to be embedded. That's pretty pathetic. Once one is not inciting violence they should be free to say whatever they want. To ban people exercising free speech is a very very slippery slope.

Kidchameleon

riclad wrote: »

I think youtube is right to ban extremists and people who push conspiracys or fake news
. I looked at bitchute. I,m not impressed by any site that shows Alex Jones videos. There's a whole industry of people who post fake news and racist extreme right wing
content. It's not easy to get banned by youtube.

Do you think the mainstream media outlets who pushed the Trump/Russia fake news* should be banned also?


*Everyone knew from the outset it was a bs story

KiKi III

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Did not know Boards will not allow BitChute to be embedded. That's pretty pathetic. Once one is not inciting violence they should be free to say whatever they want. To ban people exercising free speech is a very very slippery slope.

Posting a link instead of embedding a link in no way impinges anyone’s freedom of speech.

KiKi III

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Do you think the mainstream media outlets who pushed the Trump/Russia fake news* should be banned also?


*Everyone knew from the outset it was a bs story

You mean the investigation that resulted in convictions for a variety of Trump’s closest advisors?

https://www.businessinsider.com/who-has-been-charged-in-russia-investigation-mueller-trump-2017-12

Kidchameleon

KiKi III wrote: »

You mean the investigation that resulted in convictions for a variety of Trump’s closest advisors?

https://www.businessinsider.com/who-has-been-charged-in-russia-investigation-mueller-trump-2017-12

Yes that investigation. It was spun by the media in an attempt to influence the 2016 election. I get it, you dont want to believe it. Its fine believe what you want. Orange man bad.

CinemaGuy45

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

This is a good video from an Irish poster.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/O0fsg8ijn8E/

Computing Forever :pac::pac:

Kidchameleon

KiKi III wrote: »

Posting a link instead of embedding a link in no way impinges anyone’s freedom of speech.

I picked up the OP as BitChute was not allowed here. My bad. Is there any reason why BitChute cannot be embedded on Boards? Is it just a software issue or an ideological one?


By the way, an embedded video will get more traction than a simple link. Whilst only allowing links as opposed to embedding for ideological reasons would not be preventing free speech, it certainly would be curtailing it.

Kidchameleon

Deleted User wrote: »

Computing Forever :pac::pac:

He's a legend and YouTube fall over themselves trying to shut him up.

whippet

I fair amount of those Bitchute videos have donation and PayPal links.... woke people need to buy stuff too ....

osarusan

Argument by youtube video is always a sign that somebody can't make their own argument.

whippet

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

This is a good video from an Irish poster.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/O0fsg8ijn8E/

Is he the same wizard who was at a Gemma protest outside google explaining how cloud computing was actually nano chips that were spread by chemtrails and Google were the main culprits ... who would have thought that cloud computers were actually a cloud !!!

Why haven’t the science and technology reporters in RTÉ been telling us this ?

Kidchameleon

whippet wrote: »

Is he the same wizard who was at a Gemma protest outside google explaining how cloud computing was actually nano chips that were spread by chemtrails and Google were the main culprits ... who would have thought that cloud computers were actually a cloud !!!

Why haven’t the science and technology reporters in RTÉ been telling us this ?

He's a boards member so have a bit of respect

KiKi III

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Yes that investigation. It was spun by the media in an attempt to influence the 2016 election. I get it, you dont want to believe it. Its fine believe what you want. Orange man bad.

Have you ever considered googling the basic facts of what you’re talking about before getting things wildly wrong.

The Russia investigation we’re talking about didn’t begin until May 2017... so how exactly was it used in the media in 2016?

Blacktie.

Kidchameleon wrote: »

He's a boards member so have a bit of respect

Is it you?

statesaver

Deleted User wrote: »

Computing Forever :pac::pac:

Just looked him up :pac::pac:


He's got 442K subscribers on YouTube

How many do you have ?

Robert ninja

Youtube will be overwhelming popular but it's good to have alternatives as backup when needed. I don't know why anyone wants google to police them. They've had to pay millions in fines for privacy violations to the EU and have repeatedly been exposed to have a discriminatory political agenda. Say what you want about people you don't agree with online but don't pretend Google is any better.

Eric Cartman

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

Millions of videos on that site.

As regards conspiracy stuff if it can be debunked it is best to debunk it not ban it.

This is a good video from an Irish poster.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/O0fsg8ijn8E/

"professor Cahill...who has also been interviewed on grand torinos channel" well thats all the iron clad verification of her qualification that I need :rolleyes:

statesaver

A lot of posters here seem to agree with censorship and that is scary.

Freedom of speech must always be protected.

Kidchameleon

KiKi III wrote: »

Have you ever considered googling the basic facts of what you’re talking about before getting things wildly wrong.

The Russia investigation we’re talking about didn’t begin until May 2017... so how exactly was it used in the media in 2016?

Its yourself who is misinformed. I don't care when the investigation began, the media have been insinuating links between Trump and Russia since the early days of the campaign. It all started as a way to deflect from Hillary's email server leak.

Eric Cartman

statesaver wrote: »

A lot of posters here seem to agree with censorship and that is scary.

Freedom of speech must always be protected.

I absolutely agree with this, doesn't change that bit chute is full of nut jobs.

whippet

Eric Cartman wrote: »

"professor Cahill...who has also been interviewed on grand torinos channel" well thats all the iron clad verification of her qualification that I need :rolleyes:

Isn’t she tied in with the Irish freedom party ... the one with Hermon Kelly and Ben Gilroy as candidates at the last election ... no wonder her stuff is being shared widely by all the usual suspects

KiKi III

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Its yourself who is misinformed. I don't care when the investigation began, the media have been insinuating links between Trump and Russia since the early days of the campaign. It all started as a way to deflect from Hillary's email server leak.

I’m giving you actual, verifiable facts and you’re giving ideology-driven babble.

Eric Cartman

whippet wrote: »

Isn’t she tied in with the Irish freedom party ... the one with Hermon Kelly and Ben Gilroy as candidates at the last election ... no wonder her stuff is being shared widely by all the usual suspects

probably a doctorate in media studies or something.

Kidchameleon

KiKi III wrote: »

I’m giving you actual, verifiable facts and you’re giving ideology-driven babble.

So did Donald Trump collude with Russia or what? Can you verify that for me please with links.


Here is one article that backs up my claim that the Russia narrative began before the election....


https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/oct/07/us-russia-dnc-hack-interfering-presidential-election


Here we can see the collusion story being teed up

suicide_circus

one thing that pisses me off about youtube is the android app.

if you have a US vpn running on your phone you can minimize the video by pressing the home button and it will keep playing on a mini floating screen while you can access other apps etc on the phone but this feature is only active for ppl in the states, hence why it works with vpn.

Guy:Incognito

CinemaGuy45 wrote: »

Millions of videos on that site.

As regards conspiracy stuff if it can be debunked it is best to debunk it not ban it.

This is a good video from an Irish poster.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/O0fsg8ijn8E/

Should boards allow racists and homophobes that encourage attacks on or discrimination against these groups?

I mean, we can all just explain to these people why their views are wrong and everything will be fine, right?

Guy:Incognito

statesaver wrote: »

A lot of posters here seem to agree with censorship and that is scary.

Freedom of speech must always be protected.

Youre free to start a website and air your views all you like. No one else has to be force to air them for you. Surely the freedom goes both ways?

Mister Vain

It's not just conspiracy theorists that are having their videos removed from youtube. Doctors and immunologists that disagree with the official narrative are having their videos pulled too.

Guy:Incognito

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Orange man bad.

Stupid man child that expresses stupid views and cant raise himself above the level of a 6 year old by resisting the urge to call anyone he doesn't like a childish name when referring to them , bad.

storker

osarusan wrote: »

Argument by youtube video is always a sign that somebody can't make their own argument.

The longer the better in the hope that people won't actually watch it and assume that it adequately supports the poster's case.

statesaver

statesaver wrote: »

Just looked him up :pac::pac:


He's got 442K subscribers on YouTube

How many do you have ?

The saying that there is one born every minute comes to mind.

suicide_circus

i think the scope and the reach of the platforms got away from the companies that run them. the beast is too big. they are learning as they go. these platforms and the way humans interact with them are new phenomena.

storker

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Youre free to start a website and air youre views all you like. No one else has to be force to air them for you. Surely the freedom goes both ways?

This. YouTube is under no more obligation to host someone's sh1te than a publisher is required to publish their book or a newspaper to print their letter or Joe Duffy to take their call. It's not censorship, it's an editorial policy.

If they can upload it somewhere else, or host it on their own website, then they're not being censored.

Guy:Incognito

statesaver wrote: »

Just looked him up :pac::pac:


He's got 442K subscribers on YouTube

How many do you have ?

Gemma O'Doherty has 54k twitter followers. If that **** can get those numbers, 442k for someone in a country 65 times bigger, population wise, isnt that great an achievement.

Followers on social media isnt any metric for how valid your views are.

suicide_circus

absolutely platforms can choose what is and isnt allowed. but at that point they become publishers.

storker

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Gemma O'Doherty has 54k twitter followers. If that **** can get those numbers, 442k for someone in a country 65 times bigger, population wise, isnt that great an achievement.

Followers on social media isnt any metric for how valid your views are.

Granted, not many people may have heard the term "argumentum ad populum", but most people capable of a bit of critical thinking have figured it out for themselves anyway.

Kidchameleon

Kidchameleon wrote: »

He's a boards member so have a bit of respect

So what, since when does joining a discussion site mean someone is to be respected'?

Going by the logic of your post If someone who is a career criminal, say the type that breaks into homes of the elderly, joins the site we should be treating them with respect.

KiKi III

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Gemma O'Doherty has 54k twitter followers. If that **** can get those numbers, 442k for someone in a country 65 times bigger, population wise, isnt that great an achievement.

Followers on social media isnt any metric for how valid your views are.

She has fewer than 100 engaged followers on most tweets. That’s a percentage so low it seems probable that she’s bought fake followers at some point.

Her super high engagement posts get maybe 300 likes, many of the comments are trolling/ questioning her.

Kidchameleon

DubInMeath wrote: »

So what, since when does joining a discussion site mean someone is to be respected'?

Going by the logic of your post If someone who is a career criminal, say the type that breaks into homes of the elderly, joins the site we should be treating them with respect.

It is a rule in the sites charter. Which you signed up to... I dont make the rules so dont blame me

Kidchameleon

KiKi III wrote: »

it seems probable that she’s bought fake followers at some point.

.

How ironic. You think Gemma pulls things out of her ar5e yet here you are, literally pulling things out of yours. Have you anything to back that up, that Gemma "bought" followers?

Kidchameleon

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Stupid man child that expresses stupid views and cant raise himself above the level of a 6 year old by resisting the urge to call anyone he doesn't like a childish name when referring to them , bad.

He's a multi billionairre. Your literally spewing the mainstream narritive word for word here. He is not stupid, he is playing them at their own game and winning

Robert ninja

If Google was actually clear on what was allowed on Youtube I don't think people would have a problem with it. That could be said for every major social media platform, too. For the last few years they've shown infuriating double standards and implemented purposefully vague policies. They demonitise, shadowban and demote anything that they don't agree with without being forthcoming about it while promoting late night TV show hosts and other mainstream made-for-TV trash, as well as pure degenerates like the Paul family.

That's not what old youtube was like and it's not what the internet is good for. I want the random normal folk talking about controversial stuff in their rooms, not Google-sponsored/approved content.