96
Comments (16)
sorted by:
26
Galean 26 points ago +26 / -0

At what point should they change tos to we will remove anything we do not agree with. At least it would be honest.

3
FreedomDeliveries 3 points ago +3 / -0

it's just another aspect of elitism speak that allows people to do and say whatever they want as long as they are the right people.

15
b0ss 15 points ago +15 / -0

Freedom of speech is dead.

15
icockmyglock 15 points ago +15 / -0

This isn't even freedom of speech. This is a public official hosting a public discussion about an issue affecting the public for the public to witness.

This is a public corporations using it's private person status to flagrantly block government from effectively communicating with the people it serves. Think about that.

Frankly, at this point Google, Youtube, et al should lose all liability protections. If they're not willing to promote the public good on their publicly accessible platform because of their own partisanship then they are no longer a service. They are a publisher knowing how and why their services are being used in contrast to utilities who have liability protections from illegal use of their services because they can't know how and why it's being used that way.

12
alucard13mmfmj 12 points ago +12 / -0

They removed the president's content, they sure as hell can remove a governor's.

8
Knowbody 8 points ago +8 / -0

Maybe there should be a bill introduced to compel these companies to cite which specific part of the terms of service they claim were violated, so they can't just get away with being deliberately vague.

8
mateus 8 points ago +8 / -0

Just keep reminding sheep of that when they start spouting [selective] "science" and [hand-picked] "experts."

11
Knowbody 11 points ago +11 / -0

People need to be reminded that science doesn't come from top-down authority. It is a continual process of scrutiny.

People keep using the term "Trust the science" to mean "trust the people appointed into positions of authority", rather than actually engage in the scientific process.

8
mateus 8 points ago +8 / -0

Yes, science by its very nature is never "settled." Also, the statement by people crowing that they believe in science makes no sense.

7
Intra 7 points ago +9 / -2

muh pR1v4T3 CUMMpaNy!!

4
FreedomDeliveries 4 points ago +4 / -0

It's not "science" anymore it's now "consensus" with proof provided by news articles citing other news articles that quote a completely failed politician who once went to medical school who said something "might", "should", "could", do "something", maybe.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
2
TentElephant 2 points ago +2 / -0

anti-lockdown health experts

The WHO?

2
alucard13mmfmj 2 points ago +2 / -0

There are youtubers now saying that youtube is removing LIKES from videos. A youtuber said he lost 5000 likes on a video lol.

Good old youtube.. youtube will only allow you to dislike or like certain things haha.

1
muslimporn 1 point ago +1 / -0

I predicted this would happen over a year ago. The point I made was the conflicting values.

We have governments putting in polices to either be more transparent or expand transparency to match the opportunities technological advancement affords. The means for example broadcasting a feed of proceedings.

This would create the bizarre situation of the public sector publishing materials which they have declared that the public have a right to access only for corporations to revoke access to those materials.

It didn't take for this prediction to come true and their have been worse cases than this.

If you think that they have already been suppressing government data / statistics which is released on government websites for public dissemination for years and years now on a large scale you can establish that this was inevitable.

1
glow-operator-2-0 1 point ago +1 / -0

Nasim Aghdam did nothing wrong.