[krapp]

If it were the case that Google and Youtube were actively engaged in a campaign of "left wing authoritarianism," and that Google employed "a lot of left wing NGOs like SPLC and ADL" specifically to implement such an agenda (which is what you seem to be implying,) why would they allow right-wing content to be hosted to begin with, or not specify under their terms of service that they only allow left-wing content?

I understand the need for right-wingers to believe themselves to be victims of global leftist persecution, many forms of identity politics do so, but Youtube can legally delete any material from their platform under any terms they choose. There's no need for a conspiracy when you already have absolute and arbitrary power.

[lurker69]

Youtube publicly stated that they are working with SPLC and ADL on Youtubes Trusted Flagger Program. I am not implying that this was plan of evil CEOs from the start. But they let it happen. They let political bias seep in and steer public discourse on largest communication channels we have. This recent ridiculously vague "hate speech" rules can be used to prevent posting anything negative about arbitrary topics is we define those things as "protected groups" first. This is not partisan problem. Sooner or later this censorship that is normal now will be used against the left too.

I’m more on the side of saying that Facebook, Twitter, Youtube and the like are large enough that they should be thought of as public space. Having as much social interaction as we do on platforms that can be controlled on the whims of CEOs and business interests isn’t much different than government control of ideas, and I would argue it’s worse because the government is at least elected. They have transcended beyond a business-customer relationship and have become the largest meeting space in history, and as such they should be free and open just like a public square.

[pasabagi]

I think the problem is the right wing stalwarts like Alex Jones are doing stuff like inciting people to send hate mail to the people who lost their kids at the Sandy Hook massacre. Further, hate speech rules are often codified in law, and for good reason. It's not youtube's fault that mainstream rightwing culture is deeply sick, neither is it politicized censorship to censure people like Alex Jones.

[dreta]

I think it's a case of Google strongly enforcing their policies within the company, and not doing anything to combat moderation bias, rather than them delibelatery targeting different political views. I think, as usual, people are looking for malice where incompetence would suffice; in this case, Google failing to foster a culture of acceptance, and understanding towards a wide range of political views, given that they're a global company.

Either way, silencing political views is like fighting fire by turning off the fire alarm. I think everybody should be worried by actions like these, because this breeds radicalism by empowering one side, and making the other side feel threatened. This isn't good for anybody.