Help support WeTheArmed.com by visiting our sponsors.

Author Topic: Youtube  (Read 3258 times)

sqlbullet

  • Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 1593

  • Offline
Youtube
« on: June 12, 2018, 09:57:44 am »
Youtube, once a beacon of free speech, has declined into a steaming pile of censorship of late.  The time is now for us to do something.  Call them!

Google: 650-253-0000,  Option 5 for Youtube M – F, 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM PDT

The most recent offense they have committed is to nuke the Brownells channel.  If there is a more education oriented gunsmithing channel then I don't know what it would be.  And while my message to them is certainly to restore Brownells channel, I will continue to call them at least once each month until they restore freedom.

The only thing a tolerant society cannot tolerate is intolerance.
Utah

WeTheArmed.com

  • Advertisement
  • ***

    Plebian

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 2604

    • Offline
    Re: Youtube
    « Reply #1 on: June 12, 2018, 10:42:09 am »
    They are a private company. That gives them the right to remove channels as they wish.

    If they have rules against gunsmithing on their platform. Then it is their right to remove those that go against those rules.

    You can disagree, and you can state so publicly or call them as a consumer of their products.

    They are not infringing on freedom of speech. Since they are not part of the government. They are under no obligation to conform to ideals of 'freedom'.

    Your most powerful tool as a consumer is hurting their bottom line. It might be more effective to try and figure out a way to do so instead of focusing on calls etc.   

    Oklahoma"If all our problems are solved, we'll find new ones to replace them. If we can't find new ones, we'll make new ones."

    TommyGunn

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 3009
    • MOLON LABE

    • Offline
    Re: Youtube
    « Reply #2 on: June 12, 2018, 11:43:46 am »
    This was a big brouhaha over the weekend.  First,  Tom Gresham's radio program had Mr. Brownell on claiming yootoob  had taken their channel down without warning.
    Then I got on the 'net and yup,  it was down ---then,oooops,  it was BACK UP ON THE NET AGAIN!

    At this point it seems a glitch or IT error did this,  or a hack, maybe?   I don't really know.
    Now,  various financial institutions are conniving to deny services of one sort or another to gun companies,  that is absolutly true.
    I think Mr. Brownell and Tom Gresham,  et al,   were under an impression that the Brownell channel had been deliberately removed when it was a glitch or hack.

    Yes,  yootoob can deny what they choose  .....  but we can scream and yell and whine about it too. :neener

    But let's not.  This time.
    "Through ignorance of what is good and what is bad, the life of men is greatly perplexed." ~~ Cicero.

    NukMed

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 422

    • Offline
    Re: Youtube
    « Reply #3 on: June 12, 2018, 01:23:03 pm »
    I have a pretty strong private property instinct that is telling me that Youtube can set and maintain its own policies for its own servers.

    The other day, though, I heard an interesting argument that Youtube was less like a TV network or newspaper that has its own people create the content and decide what is shown to the public, but more like a telephone company that invites all to use its service as a communications medium.  The point of the argument being something akin to: Would we let AT&T listen to/monitor our calls for content that may be offensive to the hearer of the call?  Would we support Sprint cutting service to customers who were anonymously reported by other customers to have breached some form of etiquette?

    Honestly, I’m not sure what to think of that.  What say you all?  Is this argument valid?  Is Youtube more like a TV station or more like a phone company?  Is it its own breed of medium with unique rules governing its actions?  Do we disregard what it is and let private property principles trump all?

    What do you think?
    Freedom trumps fear.  Rights trump security.  Free will trumps order.

    sqlbullet

    • Contributor
    • ****
    • Posts: 1593

    • Offline
    Re: Youtube
    « Reply #4 on: June 12, 2018, 03:34:45 pm »
    I give up. :banghead

    Not "free" as in "natural right".  Free as in uncensored. 

    The point of this was motivate some action on our part to make them aware of the threat of damage to their bottom line.

    Your most powerful tool as a consumer is hurting their bottom line. It might be more effective to try and figure out a way to do so instead of focusing on calls etc.

    I agree that some actions might be more beneficial than others, any action is better than no action.  This is a thing to do if you don't know a more effective action.  Or in addition to more effective actions.

    But in the absence of a better action, I will call them and complain from time to time.
    Utah

    booksmart

    • Token Left Leaning Idealist Libertarian
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6597
    • E. Pluribus Unum.

    • Offline
    Re: Youtube
    « Reply #5 on: June 12, 2018, 03:39:05 pm »
    Speaking as the random liberal, I would suggest pointing out that there is a difference between educational videos regarding firearms, and videos that exhort firearms and the use of violence, and that civil discourse is not served by confusing one for the other.

    LowKey

    • Senior Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 772

    • Offline
    Re: Youtube
    « Reply #6 on: June 12, 2018, 04:34:46 pm »
    The only real long term solution is for there to be multiple other providers of a similar service to provide competition and break YouTube's effective monopoly in this arena, but that requires not only people willing to run said services (D-Tube, b____ute, ect) but also that content providers start migrating there and viewers start searching these alternatives as their primary  site rather than a backup.
    Two obvious obstacles to this-
    1.- YT, through it's parent G&&gle, has not only the lion's share of the market currently but an unfair advantage when searches on a topic are run.   I think a breakup of this monolith, along the lines of breaking up Ma Bell back in the day, would be a reasonable approach as the Internet is a communication system.
    2.- Viewers are lazy and despite their grumbles still go to YT first to search for content. As a result content providers don't appear to want to pivot onto the alternative platforms while they're still in their infancy and risk loosing "views".    I'm reminded of the song, "There's a Hole in the Bucket".  :facepalm

    Arguments have been made that YouTube is the modern towns square for purposes of voicing one's opinion to the public, but I find that argument flawed. The proverbial town square is/was public property (municipal, owned by "the people"), not privately owned.   A better analogy would be that YT is/was along the lines of the most popular pub in which people gathered to voice their opinions on varying topics, but the owners have now decided to exercise their right as property owners to  bar topics of conversation they don't wish to be associated with. 

    NukMed

    • Member
    • **
    • Posts: 422

    • Offline
    Re: Youtube
    « Reply #7 on: June 12, 2018, 05:22:33 pm »
    LowKey,

    There actually are "multiple other providers" that specialize in gun content YT won't host, but they are not as polished as YT, and they can include some unusual stuff as well.

    https://gunstreamer.com/

    https://videos.utahgunexchange.com/

    Freedom trumps fear.  Rights trump security.  Free will trumps order.

    LowKey

    • Senior Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 772

    • Offline
    Re: Youtube
    « Reply #8 on: June 12, 2018, 08:21:39 pm »
    LowKey,

    There actually are "multiple other providers" that specialize in gun content YT won't host, but they are not as polished as YT, and they can include some unusual stuff as well.

    https://gunstreamer.com/

    https://videos.utahgunexchange.com/
    I wasn't aware of those two in particular, but I've known of Full30, D-Tube, b____ute, and a few others.
    The problem is that those alternatives are still so very much only a tiny sliver of the content marketplace due to YouTube's early head start over them (not unfair), and the advantages YT gains by being a part of the Alphabet conglomerate which owns G**gle and so many other major lynchpins of the Internet. 

    In an ideal world, free market forces would level things out, but we don't actually live in a world with a free market. Alphabet has a deck stacked in their favor through politics and influence gained by campaign contributions. 

    From my perspective it seems to be the electronic world repeating the period of the Robber Barons. 

    booksmart

    • Token Left Leaning Idealist Libertarian
    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 6597
    • E. Pluribus Unum.

    • Offline
    Re: Youtube
    « Reply #9 on: June 12, 2018, 09:16:43 pm »
    The #1 rule of the internet: people go where the content is.  If a significant chunk of the weapons community makes a concerted effort to pu their content on a different platform, the search results will reflect it.

    LowKey

    • Senior Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 772

    • Offline
    Re: Youtube
    « Reply #10 on: June 12, 2018, 10:33:25 pm »
    The #1 rule of the internet: people go where the content is.  If a significant chunk of the weapons community makes a concerted effort to pu their content on a different platform, the search results will reflect it.
    Right,but because the massively overwhelming majority of content is on YT it seems that people are reluctant to put their stuff up exclusively on a non-YT platform.  As a result, when folks search for a video on any given subject the first result is a YT post, the second an alternative platform, people click on the YT posting.  Until you can't find something on YT, the alternative platform is going to be lagging behind, and as long as it's lagging behind the providers will keep posting on YT so as to avoid loosing exposure. Catch 22.

    Not to mention that it would be a bad thing if firearms related content were only available on firearms related platforms...preaching to the choir isn't a way to gain converts.   
    Long and short of it, if the concept of Freedom of Speech and Expression is to flourish on the Internet YT has to be defeated as the Goliath that it is. Preferably by a multitude of Davids.

    Grant

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 8004

    • Offline
    Re: Youtube
    « Reply #11 on: June 13, 2018, 12:11:50 am »
     Booksmart wrote:

     
    Quote
    The #1 rule of the internet: people go where the content is.  If a significant chunk of the weapons community makes a concerted effort to pu their content on a different platform, the search results will reflect it.

    The problem being that a LOT of youtube viewers came across firearms via fpsrussia,etc. and got introduced because they were on youtube for other things and then got into firearms from said videos.     Very few people who are not ALREADY interested in firearms will go to sites like full30.com etc.

       and:
     
    Quote
    Speaking as the random liberal, I would suggest pointing out that there is a difference between educational videos regarding firearms, and videos that exhort firearms and the use of violence, and that civil discourse is not served by confusing one for the other.

     And yet the videos I've seen taken down were informational videos on "bad things" like bumpstocks,etc.
    Montana"I’d say the worst part of all this is the feeling of betrayal,           but I’m betting the part where they break in here and beat us to death might be worse.”

    Mikee5star

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 2146

    • Offline
    Re: Youtube
    « Reply #12 on: June 13, 2018, 12:39:30 am »
    The beauty of yooutube is that I can go from two gun matches to heavy metal covers played on bagpipes to how to fix whatever.

    My issue with the taking down of providers is that the terms of service for providers is not real clear. 

    Also yoooutube is a hosting site, not a content creator.  They can chose who they host, but if they limit what content they will host, then they need to be clear on that.  I think that it is an issue on how easy it is to find nudity on yooutube even though that also violates the terms of service. 

    I have issues with full30 in that it will not load videos on my internet connection while yoooutube will load the exact same video at the same quality level.

    Bloke on the Range was also taken down for a few days, and then back.  I heard that no reasons were given either way.  The couple of his videos I watched were European WWI weapons at the range.  Kinda like Forgotten Weapons, but from Switzerland IIRC.

    Forgotten Weapons could have been taken down because of his auction house videos.  He links to his website, then to the "sales" site, and so far that seems to meet the ToS.
    « Last Edit: June 13, 2018, 12:51:24 am by Mikee5star »
    Alaska

    coelacanth

    • Senior Contributor
    • *****
    • Posts: 10040
    • eccentric orbit

    • Offline
    Re: Youtube
    « Reply #13 on: June 13, 2018, 02:33:00 pm »
    Yes, YouTube is aggravating.  It is also a convenience.  I like it in that role but I lived most of my life without it and I think I'll get along just fine if it is not something I use going forward.  Same goes for the parent, Google.  There are still a great many gun shops where I live and my business will always go to those intrepid souls before dealing with an online purveyor.  If I can't find an item locally and it can't be ordered through one of my local outlets then maybe I go with an online source.  Maybe.   :coffee
    Arizona" A republic, if you can keep it."

                                                   Benjamin Franklin

    Help support WeTheArmed.com by visiting our sponsors.