In 2016, YouTube created a "harassment and cyberbullying" policy. Like many modern-day policies, the intention is good, but the application has horrendous implications. And, like many modern-day policies, if you have 'concerns' about it, people assume you are therefore in support of what it is trying to prevent.
So, first point to make:
Just because there are concerns, it does NOT mean harassment and cyberbullying should be encouraged! The concerns are because of how far it can be taken.
Let's get into it. Italics will be used for the policy. Everything else will be my comments.
Harassment may include:
- Abusive videos, comments and messages
This is vague. Is a friendly joke that pokes fun at a stereotype a form of 'abuse'? If I were to talk of the Irish tap dancer who slipped and fell in the sink, am I abusing Irish people? Of course not. But it could be seen that way... more on this later.
- Revealing someone's personal information, including sensitive personally identifiable information such as social security numbers, passport numbers or bank account numbers
Sure, that makes sense. But the concern is with two little things: 'including' and 'such as'. Why would these words be concerning? Firstly, because it means that social security numbers, passport numbers and bank account numbers are not the only things counted as "sensitive personally identifiable information", they are simply examples. Secondly, because the word 'including' means 'what follows is in addition to' anything else that might be considered someone's personal information. If a video has a car numberplate, or mentions someone's name... it could be breaching the policy. In fact, many things could potentially be seen as "personal information"... more on this later.
- Maliciously recording someone without their consent
Again, this sounds good and mostly won't have any issues. But if someone says, "This video is of me, and I didn't give consent," then what will happen? Will it be taken down? Will the publisher be asked to provide evidence of consent? The process is vague. Many people record in public - which is not illegal. But if a recording is of a police officer who is abusing his/her power, then the recording could be seen as malicious... more on this later.
- Deliberately posting content in order to humiliate someone
Anything posted is obviously 'deliberate': how can you post something by accident? The wording is clever. It should read: "Posting content in order to deliberately humiliate someone." Most people will read it that way, but the wording means that YouTube can pull down a video which 'accidentally' humiliates someone, because the video was 'posted' deliberately. Yes, people, those English lessons were important after all! YouTube is using clever wording to make it mean something different.
- Making hurtful and negative comments/videos about another person
Where is the line drawn? If I watch a video and feel that my precious little feelings have been hurt by it, can I report it and have it taken down? Anything which criticises a particular viewpoint, or comments on new reporters or politicians who are disgracing themselves, could be seen as making a hurtful comment. In fact, any criticism is essentially a negative comment, so any video which aims to be a form of social commentary of political/public figures could potentially fall into this category... more on this later.
- Unwanted sexualisation, which encompasses sexual harassment or sexual bullying in any form
Again, clever words: 'which encompasses' and 'in any form'. This means that 'sexual harassment' and 'sexual bullying' are only parts of this picture, and 'in any form' is wide open to interpretation. If parents want to share a video of their family's fun holiday to the beach... someone could report 'unwanted sexualisation' of the daughter being in a swimming costume. In fact, many advertisements (which YouTube utilises) would fall into this category, and very often attractive females are used to promote products to a male audience. Do the advertisements get taken down? Of course not.
- Incitement to harass other users or creators
Now, let's say that a particular user has posted a video on a current issue which clearly has two sides, and they say something along the lines of, "Communism is the only way forward, and if you disagree you must be a bigoted, white supremacist fascist." YouTube may use its discretion that the video promotes discussion and allow it to remain. Another user may comment on the video, or create a video in response, where they say, "Actually, Communism is a disaster. It hasn't worked in history; the only times have ended with many people dying and the general population being far worse off as a result." This response, although a logical rebuttal, could be seen as an incitement to harass the creator, and could therefore be silenced... more on this now.
Wherever I have said "more on this later" I am referring to this paragraph:
Such a policy is hugely open to interpretation. It gives YouTube power to do whatever they want with any content anyone publishes... and it means no one has a change to argue against them. YouTube will win every court case because of their own interpretation, and because they created the policy, they can simply argue, "This is the intention of the policy... it is the user who misunderstood it, but that is not our responsibility."
This is exactly why policies must be questioned. 'Simple language' might seem to be beneficial to the common person, but it gives power to the corporation. James Damore was fired from Google (who owns YouTube... and this blog) for questioning them. He presented scientific evidence, but they used their vague policies to have him fired and silenced.
Why is this important? Because it stifles discussion and the pursuit of truth.
There is currently a huge battle between the political left and right. Mainstream media corporations have aligned themselves one way or another, always promoting that they are correct (which is understandable). Many people have become disillusioned and, as a result, have turned to video publishing websites, such as YouTube, in order to facilitate those much-needed discussions and to figure out the best way forward for society to proceed.
Unfortunately, some people have decided that we never really know who we are communicating with, because 'Russian bots' are obviously everywhere. As such, many things posted by real people can be taken down on the assumption that it is a 'bot' and so the voice of people - or of certain viewpoints - can be totally silenced.
YouTube itself seems to have aligned itself with the political left (not surprising, given it is owned by Google who, as mentioned before, fired an employee for providing scientific evidence of how a leftist agenda is flawed), and they censor videos which promote discussion and other viewpoints.
The reason I write this post is because a YouTube video I commented on has been taken down, leaving me with a message saying: "This video has been removed for violating YouTube's policy on harassment and bullying."
Due to the recent incident in Parkland, Florida, there were reports that a particular teenager might have been a mainstream media 'crisis actor' who jumped on this bandwagon to promote a particular corporation. I wanted to investigate this a little myself, but the vast majority of the video evidence had been pulled down by YouTube because of this supposed 'harassment' policy. I eventually found a video, watched it, and could understand why people drew that conclusion. I commented on the video.
I then receive an email saying that someone had responded to my comment, so I went to the YouTube video page to view it. But I couldn't because the video had been taken down. (Thankfully the email contained the full comment, so I could still read it.)
Do I have an insanely high IQ? I don't think so. I believe many people are capable of reading differing views and forming their own conclusions. The fight for freedom of speech is all about allowing people to discuss and form their own view. This form of censorship is typical of the political left (you know, the ones who call everyone 'bigots' if they don't agree with them) and pushes society closer to revolution... because people will eventually be so fed up with it that they will take matters into their own hands.
Corporations like YouTube, whist supposedly having policies for the 'safety' of its users, force censorship onto the population, pushing forward one viewpoint. This is called brainwashing. It is not beneficial for society and it destroys democracy.
So, first point to make:
Just because there are concerns, it does NOT mean harassment and cyberbullying should be encouraged! The concerns are because of how far it can be taken.
Let's get into it. Italics will be used for the policy. Everything else will be my comments.
Harassment may include:
- Abusive videos, comments and messages
This is vague. Is a friendly joke that pokes fun at a stereotype a form of 'abuse'? If I were to talk of the Irish tap dancer who slipped and fell in the sink, am I abusing Irish people? Of course not. But it could be seen that way... more on this later.
- Revealing someone's personal information, including sensitive personally identifiable information such as social security numbers, passport numbers or bank account numbers
Sure, that makes sense. But the concern is with two little things: 'including' and 'such as'. Why would these words be concerning? Firstly, because it means that social security numbers, passport numbers and bank account numbers are not the only things counted as "sensitive personally identifiable information", they are simply examples. Secondly, because the word 'including' means 'what follows is in addition to' anything else that might be considered someone's personal information. If a video has a car numberplate, or mentions someone's name... it could be breaching the policy. In fact, many things could potentially be seen as "personal information"... more on this later.
- Maliciously recording someone without their consent
Again, this sounds good and mostly won't have any issues. But if someone says, "This video is of me, and I didn't give consent," then what will happen? Will it be taken down? Will the publisher be asked to provide evidence of consent? The process is vague. Many people record in public - which is not illegal. But if a recording is of a police officer who is abusing his/her power, then the recording could be seen as malicious... more on this later.
- Deliberately posting content in order to humiliate someone
Anything posted is obviously 'deliberate': how can you post something by accident? The wording is clever. It should read: "Posting content in order to deliberately humiliate someone." Most people will read it that way, but the wording means that YouTube can pull down a video which 'accidentally' humiliates someone, because the video was 'posted' deliberately. Yes, people, those English lessons were important after all! YouTube is using clever wording to make it mean something different.
- Making hurtful and negative comments/videos about another person
Where is the line drawn? If I watch a video and feel that my precious little feelings have been hurt by it, can I report it and have it taken down? Anything which criticises a particular viewpoint, or comments on new reporters or politicians who are disgracing themselves, could be seen as making a hurtful comment. In fact, any criticism is essentially a negative comment, so any video which aims to be a form of social commentary of political/public figures could potentially fall into this category... more on this later.
- Unwanted sexualisation, which encompasses sexual harassment or sexual bullying in any form
Again, clever words: 'which encompasses' and 'in any form'. This means that 'sexual harassment' and 'sexual bullying' are only parts of this picture, and 'in any form' is wide open to interpretation. If parents want to share a video of their family's fun holiday to the beach... someone could report 'unwanted sexualisation' of the daughter being in a swimming costume. In fact, many advertisements (which YouTube utilises) would fall into this category, and very often attractive females are used to promote products to a male audience. Do the advertisements get taken down? Of course not.
- Incitement to harass other users or creators
Now, let's say that a particular user has posted a video on a current issue which clearly has two sides, and they say something along the lines of, "Communism is the only way forward, and if you disagree you must be a bigoted, white supremacist fascist." YouTube may use its discretion that the video promotes discussion and allow it to remain. Another user may comment on the video, or create a video in response, where they say, "Actually, Communism is a disaster. It hasn't worked in history; the only times have ended with many people dying and the general population being far worse off as a result." This response, although a logical rebuttal, could be seen as an incitement to harass the creator, and could therefore be silenced... more on this now.
Wherever I have said "more on this later" I am referring to this paragraph:
Such a policy is hugely open to interpretation. It gives YouTube power to do whatever they want with any content anyone publishes... and it means no one has a change to argue against them. YouTube will win every court case because of their own interpretation, and because they created the policy, they can simply argue, "This is the intention of the policy... it is the user who misunderstood it, but that is not our responsibility."
This is exactly why policies must be questioned. 'Simple language' might seem to be beneficial to the common person, but it gives power to the corporation. James Damore was fired from Google (who owns YouTube... and this blog) for questioning them. He presented scientific evidence, but they used their vague policies to have him fired and silenced.
Why is this important? Because it stifles discussion and the pursuit of truth.
There is currently a huge battle between the political left and right. Mainstream media corporations have aligned themselves one way or another, always promoting that they are correct (which is understandable). Many people have become disillusioned and, as a result, have turned to video publishing websites, such as YouTube, in order to facilitate those much-needed discussions and to figure out the best way forward for society to proceed.
Unfortunately, some people have decided that we never really know who we are communicating with, because 'Russian bots' are obviously everywhere. As such, many things posted by real people can be taken down on the assumption that it is a 'bot' and so the voice of people - or of certain viewpoints - can be totally silenced.
YouTube itself seems to have aligned itself with the political left (not surprising, given it is owned by Google who, as mentioned before, fired an employee for providing scientific evidence of how a leftist agenda is flawed), and they censor videos which promote discussion and other viewpoints.
The reason I write this post is because a YouTube video I commented on has been taken down, leaving me with a message saying: "This video has been removed for violating YouTube's policy on harassment and bullying."
Due to the recent incident in Parkland, Florida, there were reports that a particular teenager might have been a mainstream media 'crisis actor' who jumped on this bandwagon to promote a particular corporation. I wanted to investigate this a little myself, but the vast majority of the video evidence had been pulled down by YouTube because of this supposed 'harassment' policy. I eventually found a video, watched it, and could understand why people drew that conclusion. I commented on the video.
I then receive an email saying that someone had responded to my comment, so I went to the YouTube video page to view it. But I couldn't because the video had been taken down. (Thankfully the email contained the full comment, so I could still read it.)
Do I have an insanely high IQ? I don't think so. I believe many people are capable of reading differing views and forming their own conclusions. The fight for freedom of speech is all about allowing people to discuss and form their own view. This form of censorship is typical of the political left (you know, the ones who call everyone 'bigots' if they don't agree with them) and pushes society closer to revolution... because people will eventually be so fed up with it that they will take matters into their own hands.
Corporations like YouTube, whist supposedly having policies for the 'safety' of its users, force censorship onto the population, pushing forward one viewpoint. This is called brainwashing. It is not beneficial for society and it destroys democracy.
