YouTube going full thought police.

[Elba]

No, you can't. If you're for legislation deciding what companies can and can't do, you are against free market. There is no middle ground.

Yes I can. Look at me, here I am. Being for one and against the other. Weeeeeeeee.

[Machismo]

No, I can be for one and against the other. Are you for racial discrimination?



If you can't perform necessary medical procedures because of your conviction you have no place being a medical professional.

First off, an abortion is rarely a necessary medical procedure. Secondly, if someone wants to perform an abortion, they should be free to do so. If they do not, then they should also be free to do so.

[Stormspellz]

Really? Either you let private companies choose their own clients or you don't.

They are as long as it doesn't fall into federal discrimination zone.

[Elba]

First off, an abortion is rarely a necessary medical procedure. Secondly, if someone wants to perform an abortion, they should be free to do so. If they do not, then they should also be free to do so.

An abortion is a necessary procedure when a woman does not want to be pregnant anymore. And if you don't want to do that, don't become a doctor.

[Tiwack]

Maybe they can take their controversial views and videos elsewhere or abide by the rules in place. Even if they're right the platform they're using is sensitive to the advertisers so even if they drive the viewers, if there's no ad, it's bad business for the owner of the platform - Google. Tough world indeed but a couple of these youtubers could easily start their own platform and distribute their view on the news to the giant followings they already have. Why pewds is still on youtube is beyond me and says all I need to know about his content and average viewer. Seek investors while saving up and advertise appropriately as you do the jump to your own site. Keep the channel on youtube PC if they care about the ad-revenue and think they can funnel viewers to their new site through it.

[Zeek Daniels]

An abortion is a necessary procedure when a woman does not want to be pregnant anymore. And if you don't want to do that, don't become a doctor.

If a woman does not want to become pregnant anymore she should get her tubes tied.

[Machismo]

An abortion is a necessary procedure when a woman does not want to be pregnant anymore. And if you don't want to do that, don't become a doctor.

No, it is a procedure she wants, not one she needs. If a doctor doesn't want to do it, go to a doctor who does. People should have free access to abortion clinics, and doctors should be free to not be abortion doctors.

- - - Updated - - -

If a woman does not want to become pregnant anymore she should get her tubes tied.

That, or she should get an abortion.

[Seefer]

Yep, all the liberals, that's why these people have been threatened.........

Ragtagg
Secular Talk
Wrestling with Wregret and other wrestling youtubers
Boogie
L0nehawk

and so many others, get a grip and stop bringing your political blame game into this, hell Conservatives are all "Free speech free speech!" until someone says negatively about them then it's all "Censor the media, stop talking bad about me".

[therayeffect]

No, it is a procedure she wants, not one she needs. If a doctor doesn't want to do it, go to a doctor who does. People should have free access to abortion clinics, and doctors should be free to not be abortion doctors.

- - - Updated - - -



That, or she should get an abortion.

What about when an abortion is needed?

[Machismo]

What about when an abortion is needed?

Then she should go to an abortion doctor.

[therayeffect]

Maybe they can take their controversial views and videos elsewhere or abide by the rules in place. Even if they're right the platform they're using is sensitive to the advertisers so even if they drive the viewers, if there's no ad, it's bad business for the owner of the platform - Google. Tough world indeed but a couple of these youtubers could easily start their own platform and distribute their view on the news to the giant followings they already have. Why pewds is still on youtube is beyond me and says all I need to know about his content and average viewer. Seek investors while saving up and advertise appropriately as you do the jump to your own site. Keep the channel on youtube PC if they care about the ad-revenue and think they can funnel viewers to their new site through it.

I think the problem is more that we'll have to trust Big Brother Google to not censor stuff they disagree with. I dislike Google but I don't really see how this is 'full thought police'. I get that people don't trust Google but I don't see this as going full thought police.

- - - Updated - - -

Then she should go to an abortion doctor.

And what if none are available?

[Machismo]

I think the problem is more that we'll have to trust Big Brother Google to not censor stuff they disagree with. I dislike Google but I don't really see how this is 'full thought police'. I get that people don't trust Google but I don't see this as going full thought police.

- - - Updated - - -



And what if none are available?

And why would you go to a doctor who doesn't want, or know how to perform one, and force him to do it? I support far less restrictions on abortion clinics, so they can exist freely.. Therefore, a woman will have access to abortion services, without forcing someone to give her one.

[Elba]

No, it is a procedure she wants, not one she needs. If a doctor doesn't want to do it, go to a doctor who does. People should have free access to abortion clinics, and doctors should be free to not be abortion doctors.

Not wanting to be pregnant is a need. There is no place for religious nonsense in medicine. Too important. What's next? Doctors refusing vaccines? Jehova's witness doctors refusing blood transfusion?

Revoke their license if they can't be professional.

- - - Updated - - -

without forcing someone to give her one.

Nobody is being forced. Don't want to do it? Stop being a doctor. Become a chiropractor.

[therayeffect]

And why would you go to a doctor who doesn't want, or know how to perform one, and force him to do it? I support far less restrictions on abortion clinics, so they can exist freely.. Therefore, a woman will have access to abortion services, without forcing someone to give her one.

I'm not sure where you got that I said all of that. What you talked about is the problem with 'choice' though. Obviously being qualified is important, but there are states in the US where there /might/ still be one abortion clinic open and I'm sure that place gets harassed daily. A Doctor's office (if it receives public funding at all) shouldn't be a place where religion is involved.

This kind of thought is along the same vein as the issue with trusting Google. What's offensive to them? They're (of course) super vague in their restrictions and everything will happen behind closed doors. I'm not really sure how youtube is going to do away with ads on basically anything when every cable TV channel has adds running.

[Deathquoi]

This is straight out of an Orwell novel. I am disgusted but not surprised by how many people are for this. This generation is so conditioned to be self-loathing and have no faith in free thought. Are "wrong" ideas so dangerous that instead of being debated they need to be crushed and destroyed? This isn't the death of "alt-right" outlets, it's the death of free discourse. 21st century book burning. I understand that as a private company they have the right to do this, it doesn't make it the right thing to do though.

It's straight out of an Orwell novel? Really? In which Orwell novel were companies free to decide what content they published?

[Machismo]

Not wanting to be pregnant is a need. There is no place for religious nonsense in medicine. Too important. What's next? Doctors refusing vaccines? Jehova's witness doctors refusing blood transfusion?

Revoke their license if they can't be professional.

- - - Updated - - -



Nobody is being forced. Don't want to do it? Stop being a doctor. Become a chiropractor.

You literally just used "want" to try and describe a necessity. It's not a necessity, it's a want. This is not about religion, and I think abortion should be legal.

It is about force, because you want to force them to do it, or else... If it weren't about force, you would say, "If they don't want to perform abortions, then they don't have to. Period.

Also, not all doctors know how to give abortions.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm not sure where you got that I said all of that. What you talked about is the problem with 'choice' though. Obviously being qualified is important, but there are states in the US where there /might/ still be one abortion clinic open and I'm sure that place gets harassed daily. A Doctor's office (if it receives public funding at all) shouldn't be a place where religion is involved.

This kind of thought is along the same vein as the issue with trusting Google. What's offensive to them? They're (of course) super vague in their restrictions and everything will happen behind closed doors. I'm not really sure how youtube is going to do away with ads on basically anything when every cable TV channel has adds running.

That's why I noted I want to also get rid of the restrictions that limit abortion clinics, so there would be more around.

For me, this isn't about religion, it's about freedom. And yes, that means freedom for everyone.

[A dot Ham]

https://youtube.googleblog.com/2017/...-to-fight.html

We all know how people who say the wrong things (read: don't peddle SJW bullshit) on YouTube have most of their videos demonetized... Philip Defranco, H3H3, PewDiePie, Dave Rubin, etc... People who don't say anything even remotely hateful or extremist, but merely disagree with regressive bullshit...

Well YouTube is taking it to the next level with their new policy:



Now we can all agree that terrorist videos should be taken down, that is not an issue at all...

But as we have already seen in the last six months, with all of the advertiser controversy on YouTube and all of their initiatives to remove "terrorist" and "extremist" content... All that has really happened is that many of these 'deviant' channels (by that I mean, not social justice channels) have been labeled extremist, hateful, controversial, etc., and had most of their videos demonetized.

Now, not only will that keep happening and happen even harder... But in addition to having their ad revenue taken away, their videos will essentially be hidden, all of the features on them will be disabled, AND searches for their videos will redirect to a YouTube curated social justice playlist...

This is only the beginning by the way, as YouTube is merely one platform in the "Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism", which includes Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, and many other companies who will all implement similar policies to curb speech they disagree with.

Google already does this.

Youtube has already been doing this or at least a form of it, in that your searches are driven to specific content that is more profitable and may be totally off base from what you actually may want to view.

There are other hosting sites out there, and if you want to view that type of material you can. Furthermore, as much as I hate seeing liberals get there way... there is nothing stopping anyone from creating a website that hosts videos of a conservative nature, or has an obvious conservative slant/bias.

What continues to upset me in the current climate is that no one is 100% satisfied with this 2 party system, yet you all do everything in your power to polarize viewpoints and make sure they land in one camp or the other. As if a person couldn't be both a humanitarian AND be fiscally responsible.

Lets be real in 2017 we claim to be accepting of everyone regardless of gender, sexual preference, race, etc (all things we can physically see), but when it comes to our ideals, our thoughts, our beliefs, this couldn't be a more prejudice, intolerant, and segregational age.

[Deathquoi]

I hope none of you who think this is great are going to bitch about what's coming with ISPs and the repeal of net neutrality.

This is almost a comical false equivalency. You have no idea what net neutrality is, what title II is, and what an ISP like Comcast or Verizon actually does. Comcast and Verizon regulating internet access is like some random person buying a single highway onramp and putting a tollbooth there and deciding who has access to the entire highway.

[cparle87]

Blockchain alternatives are coming to replace centrally controlled media distribution sites like Youtube. Creators will get paid directly for their content and by pass the middle man. Youtube doesn't know it yet but their model is dead. It's by no means guaranteed to succeed though. So support these alternatives when you see them if you want an open internet.

The new model isn't guaranteed to succeed but the old model is still dead? How does that work?

[scmpoe]

Yes I can. Look at me, here I am. Being for one and against the other. Weeeeeeeee.

Indeed you are, and that's called being a hypocrite.

You're too caught up in your ideology bubble to see it though.