[rayiner]

For example: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2019... (AOC: “the world is going to end in 12 years if we don't address climate change.").

This is flat-earth conspiracy theory level falsehood. And it’s a falsehood about an extremely politically and socially important issue that if widely accepted could have massive repercussions. Is YouTube going to censor it?

[millstone]

This is hyperbole and AOC would be the first to acknowledge it. If "the world will literally end in 12 years" were to take root, then it would be a massive problem for society, not just YouTube.

[Ma8ee]

That might be hyperbole, but some people in Australia or California might not think she’s so far off already today.

[factotvm]

Predictions are different than lies.

[factotvm]

According to the downvotes, my statement must be false and predictions are the same as lies.

If it’s been proven false, don’t say it. If it can’t be proven false, carry on, as that’s not against the terms and conditions.

Or, a false equivalency between saying the election was stolen, and saying the world will end in 12 years if we don’t do something.

[rayiner]

“Proven false” clearly isn’t the standard. Nobody has proven the election fraud claims false. (Or the Hunter Biden e-mails story.) Like AOC’s misinformation about climate change, the conclusions are just extremely unlikely based on the facts we know. That’s been a high enough bar for censorship.

[factotvm]

But one is about the past and one is about the future.

And those items in the past have been heavily investigated, brought to the courts, and due to no evidence, summarily rebuked.

Apples and oranges.

Don’t get me wrong, the world ending in 12 years is a silly thing to say.