Freedom of Speech and YouTube comments

[Mr Allen]

Topic.

Because YouTube is owned by Google, which is based in North America, they are governed by "freedom of speech" laws under the er, 2nd Amendment is it? And earlier today I was watching an old Top of the Pops episode from December 1972, and some guy was on about the late Michael Jackson, Marc Bolan and the still alive Rolf Harris, being Paedophiles, and I commented that it was the early 70's, the Internet hadn't been invented yet so it wasn't widely known that these people were like THAT... Consequently I was accused of sympathising with them, WTF?! Even under US law is this even legal?!

I reported the guy anyway but I'm 99.9% certain the Mods won't do anything because of said "freedom of speech" laws.

Has this happened to anyone else, where inappropriate posts on YouTube which has almost no censorship have been posted?

 

[WildCat]

Mods? I believe that's the decision of whoever operates the channel, which I suppose counts as moderation in this case. It's their choice whether or not to filter or censor certain comments or to even care in the first place, and like it or not you're probably not going to get your way.

Not just that, but Youtube is pretty massive...loads more offensive content where that came from, so some good advice would be to simply ignore it and go on about your business. Seriously, there's not a lot to be gained engaging in petty drama over words that can easily be avoided by simply paying no attention to it.

 

[Catana]

"Consequently I was accused of sympathising with them, WTF?! Even under US law is this even legal?!"

Yes, it's not only legal, that kind of response is considered normal these days. It's actually pretty typical of internet "discussion." People react on the basis of emotion rather than logic: if you don't condemn the person being attacked, then you're supporting them. Black or white, either/or. Get used to it, and stop wasting your time and energy on that kind of stupidity. There are more important things to be indignant about.

 

[Theta.G]

The uploader controls the comments on their video. The bigger over reach is in recent years Youtube implemented new policies and new algorithms which absolutely destroy free speech for creators. Not unlike people being arrested for "hate speech" en masse in England which has also been going on for a while. Their idea of hate speech is loosely defined. Usually it's people who speak out against the muslim gangs and floods of migrants that get cuffed. But can also apply to simple social media posts, being critical of authority. Yea. In some 1st world countries now you can get jailed for criticizing the Queen or your government officials.

Promote the garbage like buzzfeed and daily show.Consumerist content / "Look at me in this $500,000 hotel room!" etc

 

[xudo]

Not unlike people being arrested for "hate speech" en masse in England which has also been going on for a while.

Where in England exactly?

 

[Southern Discomfort]

Topic.

Because YouTube is owned by Google, which is based in North America, they are governed by "freedom of speech" laws under the er, 2nd Amendment is it? And earlier today I was watching an old Top of the Pops episode from December 1972, and some guy was on about the late Michael Jackson, Marc Bolan and the still alive Rolf Harris, being Paedophiles, and I commented that it was the early 70's, the Internet hadn't been invented yet so it wasn't widely known that these people were like THAT... Consequently I was accused of sympathising with them, WTF?! Even under US law is this even legal?!

I reported the guy anyway but I'm 99.9% certain the Mods won't do anything because of said "freedom of speech" laws.

Has this happened to anyone else, where inappropriate posts on YouTube which has almost no censorship have been posted?

YouTube comments system is a cesspit of toxic crap, don't even bother trying to have a reasonable discussion on it. I'm surprised you're surprised by it.

Not unlike people being arrested for "hate speech" en masse in England which has also been going on for a while

Oh yawn!

If you're referring to anything Britain First or BNP related, they got what they deserved. There is no place in British society for their vile speeches.

 

[Progster]

You can find some well thought out posts on YouTube, if you are prepared to sift through all the mindless troll comments. Personally, I wouldn't bother with it, just ignore those comments. They aren't worth getting upset about. Youtube is just one big trollfest half the time - I don't have an account there and have no desire to take part in the discussions.

 

[Judge]

Civil concerns online remain a complicated subject in any number of ways pertinent to US laws.

In the simplest sense, Internet domains are primarily proprietary in nature. Where moderators of forum members generally follow policy and guidelines in accordance with the site owner or their own judgment and common sense. Without any considerations of constitutional civil liberties such as our First Amendment rights. Much like social clubs, which are not obliged to adhere to any sense of civil rights or civil liberties laws.

Also consider the civil legal aspects of the terms and conditions one agrees to abide by with pretty much any proprietary online domain. You agree to hold the host harmless no matter what happens. Even if another party within the same domain violates them in terms of perceived personal injury against you.

In other words, unless you are wealthy and can afford to wage a civil legal battle with an online host, your real "beef" is with the person who maligned you. Not the host. You can sue the host, but don't expect your case to go much of anywhere unless you can tactically breach their hold harmless provisions which you contractually agreed to abide by in the first place.

If one wants to take real advantage of our civil rights and civil liberties protections, they have to be here both physically and legally. Going online to a website hosted on US soil isn't likely to count. Besides, there are a number of Supreme Court precedents which have greatly strengthened free speech rights in general. Precedents I might add that have nothing to do with the Internet. Making a case for slander or libel that much more difficult in a US civil court.

 

[Theta.G]

Where in England exactly?

Mainly Britain.

Oh yawn!

If you're referring to anything Britain First or BNP related, they got what they deserved. There is no place in British society for their vile speeches.

Average people. So free speech for everyone right, except average citizens who even slightly resemble one of their views in anyway? Any views that oppose the narrative. Thanks for proving my point SD. You summed it up nicely. Free speech for all except this group, that group, these people, those people.

#What is free speech?

 

[Iamnotarabot]

Violent comments are everywhere on the web, and youtube is no exception. insults, racist comments, death threats , etc...it is common.

Just try to take it less personnaly if you get trashed on the internet, the situation is most of the time 2 anonymous persons talking, not 2 identified individuals.

Ho yeah create an account without your name on it thats better xD.

But the real free spech ,the one of an identified individual that has actual rights, is dying at the moment, both on the web and IRL ( cases of youtuber being litteraly persecuted by the system both on the web and IRL)

But the free speech on internet is actually a good question, since popular websites have become the new public places of our generation, even if they "own" what we use, they should be compelled to grant free speech, in that case the ability to post content, even if it is controversial.

To defend themselve they use the term of hate speech to defend censorship, with a very vague notion , hate speech means nothing legally, most of the time this is resumed by " what liberals dont agree with". This is just the common factor of any political comment censored on the web xD


To be fair, i dont realy agree with the notion of free speech in the anglo saxon world, i think the french notion is better, and the notion of hate speech ( i censor whatever i feel offensive because i dont agree) is a bad response to a bad notion of free speech ( i say whatever i want.)

 

[Judge]

Average people. So free speech for everyone right, except average citizens who even slightly resemble one of their views in anyway?

It is ironic to note that virtually all landmark free speech decisions of the US Supreme Court involve those who in most cases could be called anything but "average citizens".

Most Americans are tenacious about the free speech rights they think they have, even though most are completely unaware of where they begin and end, or that they were based largely on the actions of political extremists and pornographers.

 

[tree]

 

[Mr Allen]

YouTube comments system is a cesspit of toxic crap, don't even bother trying to have a reasonable discussion on it. I'm surprised you're surprised by it.




Oh yawn!

If you're referring to anything Britain First or BNP related, they got what they deserved. There is no place in British society for their vile speeches.

No one cares about the BNP any more anyway, it's not like Nick Griffin and chums have ANY chance of ever being elected, because even the dumbest Daily Fail reading racists aren't stupid enough to vote for them in a General Election.

 

[Fridgemagnetman]

Where in England exactly?

Cardiff

 

[Fridgemagnetman]

The best invention ever was to spread the idea of

The right to have an opinion.

 

[Mr Allen]

Cardiff

Cardiff is in Wales, not England.

 

[NothingToSeeHere]

Mainly Britain.

You know England is part of Britain, not the other way around right?

Guess I'd better be more careful not to criticise politicians or the queen so often, I might have the police knocking down my door any day now...

 

[Southern Discomfort]

Mainly Britain.



Average people. So free speech for everyone right, except average citizens who even slightly resemble one of their views in anyway? Any views that oppose the narrative. Thanks for proving my point SD. You summed it up nicely. Free speech for all except this group, that group, these people, those people.

#What is free speech?

Spare me your opinion. I don't care enough your far right heroes to continue this line of conversation. Bottom line: if you support hate groups then you're not the sort of person I ever want to talk to. And with that, I end this conversation.

Oh and don't bother replying, I'm not going to be reading it.

 

[WildCat]

Well, this thread's going south at a steady pace now...I guess this is what happens when you exercise your right to free speech.

Make no mistake about it. It's free just like it says on the tin, no down payment required, no credit checks and no hidden fees, but at what cost?

 

[Fridgemagnetman]

Cardiff is in Wales, not England.

One deems there is an ineluctable preponderance to correct others and an equally strong desire to avoid hearing corrections that others may see about you.
Mine was,in one sense,an inconsequential 'cardiff' and yours.....
As manifold as any other human.