[adamrezich]

thought experiment:

what if YouTube existed and was as popular as it is now, in the early 00s, leading up to the US invasion of Iraq, and there videos attempting to prove that Iraq did not in fact have weapons of mass destruction, and YouTube was deleting these videos?

wouldn't it be suddenly obvious that these videos must be taken down immediately, accounts banned and that platform owners are responsible? or would you advocate for free speech and watch as the algorithm encourages more and more people to question the Bush administration narrative, parroted and perpetuated unquestioningly by the media?

[asdff]

How would a video on youtube prove iraq did or did not have wmds? That wasn't determined until the US was able to inspect the country themselves. That's the thing of this. Anonymous accounts on the internet should not be seen as a source of truth since videos are easily misconstrued or manipulated or are outright fraudulent, yet people frequently hold up some faceless video as their truth rather than someone who spends all their time working in whatever area and is paid to have this expert knowledge. Like, imagine millions of people rejecting the advice of plumbers when it came to plumbing thanks to these crazy conspiracy videos being circled around the internet. That's not helpful to society, but its literally happening when it means medical advice.