- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Is cancelling a YouTube channel a digital book burning?
Posted on 6/23/20 at 10:28 pm
Posted on 6/23/20 at 10:28 pm
Is banning a YouTube channel or banning someone from twitter the ethical equivalent to a book burning?
I think it could be worse. Book burnings were mostly just symbolic in nature. Eliminating a viewpoint from social media is more direct censorship. Neither eliminates the existence of those opinions.
What is the OT’s opinion on digital book burnings?
I think it could be worse. Book burnings were mostly just symbolic in nature. Eliminating a viewpoint from social media is more direct censorship. Neither eliminates the existence of those opinions.
What is the OT’s opinion on digital book burnings?
This post was edited on 6/23/20 at 10:42 pm
18
Posted on 6/23/20 at 10:41 pm to goofball
Not even close.
Books are reviewed and edited. People mistake YouTube for something valuable. Any random person can make a YouTube video and pose their opinion as fact.
Books are reviewed and edited. People mistake YouTube for something valuable. Any random person can make a YouTube video and pose their opinion as fact.
Posted on 6/23/20 at 10:43 pm to ElJefe686
quote:
Any random person can make a YouTube video and pose their opinion as fact.
People present their opinion as fact in books all the time.
Posted on 6/23/20 at 10:46 pm to goofball
Yes
/Thread
/Thread
Posted on 6/23/20 at 10:48 pm to ElJefe686
quote:
Not even close.
Books are reviewed and edited. People mistake YouTube for something valuable. Any random person can make a YouTube video and pose their opinion as fact.
Unless they’re calling for direct violence, I say go frick yourself. It’s a tragedy I have only one downvote to give to you. Hopefully other posters here will give me a hand.
This post was edited on 6/23/20 at 10:49 pm
Posted on 6/23/20 at 10:53 pm to ElJefe686
quote:
Books are reviewed and edited. People mistake YouTube for something valuable. Any random person can make a YouTube video and pose their opinion as fact
Is this a serious post?
Posted on 6/23/20 at 10:56 pm to ElJefe686
quote:
Books are reviewed and edited. People mistake YouTube for something valuable
Reviewed and edited by leftists who only approve of state sponsored messages
YouTube is valuable. It gives a voice and platform to all different viewpoints, yet you’re in favor of censorship and striking down those whose opinion you disagree with. You’re trash
Posted on 6/23/20 at 11:03 pm to goofball
quote:
Is banning a YouTube channel or banning someone from twitter the ethical equivalent to a book burning?
No... YouTube has 0 obligation to give you a platform. It'd be more like a library refusing to stock a book.
Posted on 6/23/20 at 11:04 pm to goofball
quote:
Is banning a YouTube channel or banning someone from twitter the ethical equivalent to a book burning?
It’s the ethical equivalent of.. a business engaging in free enterprise.
You can’t buy Hustler at Barnes & Noble, but that doesn’t mean Hustler can’t sell magazines. You also can’t post porno vids on YouTube... you get the idea. They are free to manage the videos they host as they see fit, just like TexAgs is free to ban LSU fans for posting Aggy gifs. And their users are free to switch to stop watching YouTube videos if they feel it’s gone too far.
In fact, with all of the outrage over YouTube and Twitter, you would think there’s a business opportunity for a young entrepreneur to build the next big “free speech” social media platform. That’s kind of a basic tenet of free market capitalism - if you feel like there’s a gap in the market, build a better mousetrap.
ETA: And before somebody gives me the “too big to fail” spiel, YouTube has existed for 15 years and Twitter has existed for 14 years. Hell, the iPhone was only introduced 13 years ago. Remember when MySpace was the largest social media site in the world?
This post was edited on 6/23/20 at 11:09 pm
Posted on 6/24/20 at 1:17 am to ElJefe686
quote:
Books are reviewed and edited.
What makes a random person’s opinion and representation on facts different because it is on paper?
Posted on 6/24/20 at 5:19 am to goofball
Every Fundamentalist Progressive ever lining up to angrily scream “ less Free Speech “ ! Puritan idiots.
Posted on 6/24/20 at 6:33 am to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
What makes a random person’s opinion and representation on facts different because it is on paper?
All of the dangerous opinions are shared on YouTube and Twitter.
Posted on 6/24/20 at 6:37 am to ElJefe686
quote:
Any random person can make a YouTube video and pose their opinion as fact.
:kige:
Posted on 6/24/20 at 6:38 am to MoarKilometers
quote:
No... YouTube has 0 obligation to give you a platform. It'd be more like a library refusing to stock a book.
Do we have angry mobs demanding that libraries don’t stick books? Because we definitely have that now with social media accounts that provide inconvenient viewpoints.
Posted on 6/24/20 at 6:39 am to goofball
No. Removing Tom Sawyer and To Kill a Mockingbird from digital stores is a digital book burning.
I've been buying classic books in hard copy for years now so that my children will have the ability to read them
I've been buying classic books in hard copy for years now so that my children will have the ability to read them
Posted on 6/24/20 at 6:43 am to lostinbr
quote:
You can’t buy Hustler at Barnes & Noble, but that doesn’t mean Hustler can’t sell magazines.
Banning someone from YouTube that is critical of BLM or the current Marxist uprising doesn’t cancel their point of view. That still exists.
It does say a lot about contemporary progressive ideology.
Posted on 6/24/20 at 6:50 am to goofball
It's more like having a town hall meeting, and not allowing some people to speak. And since the people who run it are fully aware of how important social media has become, controlling who can participate is no longer just a matter of a private company exercising its rights. It's flexing their muscles as the propaganda wing of one of the two political parties in control of this country. And we know that because those in charge of Twitter and Facebook have said so. They do what they do to empower the far left and and silence conservative ideas.
Posted on 6/24/20 at 6:58 am to goofball
quote:No. It's more like a publisher deciding what it wants to publish and not publishing everything everyone wants published.
Is cancelling a YouTube channel a digital book burning?
Posted on 6/24/20 at 7:04 am to WDE24
quote:
No. It's more like a publisher who controls 99% of publishing , and who enjoys special platform legal protections carved out specifically for them, deciding what it wants to publish and not publishing Anything that does not conform to very narrow Progressive ideology .
FIFY.
Posted on 6/24/20 at 7:10 am to Lsupimp
YouTube controls 99% of online video content? No way. Not even close. There are lots of online avenues to post videos.
This post was edited on 6/24/20 at 7:11 am
Page 1 of 5
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News