Infowars one strike away from YouTube ban

[araine]

it does in the us. it's a shame that is the price we must pay, but i wouldn't have it any other way.

No it doesnt. hate speech is not protected speech never have been and should never be. same way slander etc isnt protected speech. What free speech is there to grant you is the protected right to protest and petition your government on issues and i can promise you hate speech is not part of those protected issues

The key issue here is GOVERNMENT since free speech does never apply in the private sphere a private company have no reason to keep your voice of hate speech open if they so choose. Same reason you can be silenced and banned on a message forum like this, no free speech protections in place and same goes for youtube

[Sormine]

If what they are saying is so dumb and outrageous why not just counter it with hard facts?
The fact that the government wants to silence them is very suspicious to me.

Because you can't just insert yourself into a youtube video and present the facts that disagree with what he's saying. People are free to not look into the facts after they have heard what Alex Jones' has said. They just often don't explore it any further and it creates this false belief of knowing the truth.

Additionally, Youtube is not the government. Alex Jones is free to say whatever he wants but he has to abide by platforms terms of service. Just like you and I.

[derpkitteh]

No it doesnt. hate speech is not protected speech never have been and should never be. same way slander etc isnt protected speech. What free speech is there to grant you is the protected right to protest and petition your government on issues and i can promise you hate speech is not part of those protected issues

The key issue here is GOVERNMENT since free speech does never apply in the private sphere a private company have no reason to keep your voice of hate speech open if they so choose. Same reason you can be silenced and banned on a message forum like this, no free speech protections in place and same goes for youtube

hatespeech is protected. that's why the KKK and neonazis can have rallies and protests.

[kail]

If what they are saying is so dumb and outrageous why not just counter it with hard facts?
The fact that the government wants to silence them is very suspicious to me.

Google is not part of the government.

[Martymark]

Infowars was a joke screaming about gay goblin frogs until the 2016 election when main news sources lied so much that suddenly infowars was one of the most trustworthy newsources.

[pathora44]

Infowars was a joke screaming about gay goblin frogs until the 2016 election when main news sources lied so much that suddenly infowars was one of the most trustworthy newsources.

Ya no, really just no. Everything Info Wars peddles are lies and Alex Jones admitted to it in court. Believing a word of it says far more about your intelligence.

[araine]

hatespeech is protected. that's why the KKK and neonazis can have rallies and protests.

And why a private company like Youtube can ban them. no where do you have the right to spew your hate speech like that

[Orbitus]

Let's laugh together. :-)

It's a ticket to Google's security and it's authentic. Obviously, it's an accident that the person who they want to escort out of the premises has right-wing views. He could just as well have been a left-wing activist. Obviously.

So no source? got it.

[araine]

Ya no, really just no. Everything Info Wars peddles are lies and Alex Jones admitted to it in court. Believing a word of it says far more about your intelligence.

they claim it is infotainment and some of them like Fox even went to court to make sure they are allowed to lie

[Orbitus]

Different baker.

Really? Which one? Because every time I see people stating a bakery, it is the one that was in Colorado that doxxed the couple.

- - - Updated - - -

I will leave you guessing. Frankly, it is amazing how little you actually know / have seen or read yet how much weight you put into your opinions, especially compared to those of others. You basically say "it's X" and then spend pages constructing reasons to reject everything talking against that. In the end, it's your loss. Ten years ago I would have happily butted heads for days, but I grew out of it, so we are out of luck here.

So, you can't provide it, and expect people to know the entirety of the internet? It is called burden of proof, if you make a claim, back it up.

- - - Updated - - -

If what they are saying is so dumb and outrageous why not just counter it with hard facts?
The fact that the government wants to silence them is very suspicious to me.

The government isn't silencing anyone. Don't know where you got that bullshit. And it doesn't matter when dumbass Jones followers are committing acts of violence and harassment because they are attacking a pizza place that was accused in Pizzagate or harassing the parents of slain kids. You can't counter dumbasses like that with facts, they just say that it is, again, a liberal conspiracy against them.

[Moralgy]

Infowars was a joke screaming about gay goblin frogs until the 2016 election when main news sources lied so much that suddenly infowars was one of the most trustworthy newsources.

So info wars suddenly started telling the truth? Or are you saying because others lied you started to believe a bullshit peddling website as truth?

One of those seems more likely than the other considering infowars still spouts conspiracy garbage.

[Machismo]

Infowars was a joke screaming about gay goblin frogs until the 2016 election when main news sources lied so much that suddenly infowars was one of the most trustworthy newsources.

Maybe you can provide evidence of all those lies.

Also, you never answered my question.

- - - Updated - - -

they claim it is infotainment and some of them like Fox even went to court to make sure they are allowed to lie

For the record, that was not Fox News, that was a Fox affiliate, I believe in Florida.

[JohnBrown1917]

Infowars was a joke screaming about gay goblin frogs until the 2016 election when main news sources lied so much that suddenly infowars was one of the most trustworthy newsources.

You guys actually believe this, huh?

[Endus]

So, you can't provide it, and expect people to know the entirety of the internet? It is called burden of proof, if you make a claim, back it up.

The root of the whole persecution complex is the combined forces of cherry-picking data points, and assuming correlation means causation.

They find a handful of data points where "someone was banned/demonetized/whatever" which correlate to "someone has right-wing views", ignore all other data points where right-wingers WEREN'T banned or demonetized, or where left-wing or non-partisan people were so banned/demonetized, and then additionally ignore all other potential causative factors that could possibly have led to that action.

It's pretty freaking ridiculous. Practically "gay frogs" levels of silliness. But damn you if you point that out.

[RobertoCarlos]

The problem with places like infowars and people like alex jones is that they are good in the business of turning everything into a conspiracy just for the hell of it and theres always a reason to acts it can never just be random

I mean as soon as a school shooting happens they are looking for different angles as to why to happened that are not there, like at the moment the obsession is over "Crisis actors"

They go through this shit yearly, they seem to have certain hot topics that come up and they go through different fads monthly. This month is crisis actors hyping up school schootings because democrats randomly choose now to come for the guns!. Next it will be a "white house insider" is "leaking info" or back to pedo's meeting in forests wearing goat heads.

[Martymark]

Democracy dies in darkness!

[Machismo]

Democracy dies in darkness!

So, are you still unwilling to back your absurd claims and answer simple questions?

- - - Updated - - -

All libertarians claim they’re the only true libertarian. If you press them enough on their beliefs at least.

Well, as a true libertarian, I agree with you. Most of the people who claim to be libertarians are lying assholes.

Yes, the first sentence was in jest.

[Orbitus]

Democracy dies in darkness!

Again, this has nothing to do with free speech or democracy. If anyone deserves to be banned for malicious falsehoods and pushing conspiracy theories, it is Infowars.

[Rhaide]

Please show me where the crazy left wingers are, thanks.

- - - Updated - - -



Suggesting one side isn't worse than the other is insane. You think they're not significantly different?

Don't get me wrong, the two major parties are both vastly different but they are both disgusting. I lean more to the left personally, but I hate the Democratic party almost as much as the GOP.

The GOP is more immediately and obviously dangerous, they want to restrict things NOW and the worst among them are racist assholes... however the Dems are more insidiously dangerous, they pretend they hold higher ideals while lining their pockets with lobby money and funding campaigns with super pacs, they shout for change they don't believe in and win votes by making short term promises to the downtrodden with no plans to lift them up in the long run.

Both sides are awful, I wish there was another choice - but realistically that won't happen for some time... We need a third party candidate to somehow garner major support at the same time that both the major parties put out Clintons and Trumps. That's the only way it seems.

Some background, btw: I would 100% get behind a candidate with strong democratic social ideals but moderate, somewhat right leaning economic ones. We need empathy for the lower class that is tempered by economic good sense, programs that make a difference, and when handouts are the right action, they need to have measurable requirements and strings attached. We need a role-model state, not a nanny state.

[Martymark]

So, are you still unwilling to back your absurd claims and answer simple questions?

I feel like it's not worth the effort to back up my "absurd claims" because none of the sources I use will be acceptable to you and "your truth".