YouTube is deleting comments with two phrases that insult China’s Communist Party

[jagdtigger]

The existence of a dictatorship is derogatory, should we just delete china?

[williamcll]

Ironic that the land of the free becomes just as authoritarian (or even greater) than a communist nation, then people were not happy when the socialist candidate lost to a neoliberal. The salt in these posts are palatable.

 

>inb4 thread lock

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, LAwLz said:

 

We do actually have the right to demand that they don't do it. Youtube however has no legal obligation to comply with our demands.

 

Yes yes, true and all, but it's as futile as demanding someone stop being a human and start being a bird,  we can demand all we like but we have no authority to cause it to be.

[MegaDave91]

3 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Yes yes, true and all, but it's as futile as demanding someone stop being a human and start being a bird,  we can demand all we like but we have no authority to cause it to be.

What's wrong with that?

 

 

[LAwLz]

2 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Yes yes, true and all, but it's as futile as demanding someone stop being a human and start being a bird,  we can demand all we like but we have no authority to cause it to be.

Well it seems like it is actually working.

For example when people complained to Facebook that they shouldn't allow anti-vaxxers or things like "bleach enemas cures autism" (which I should all, Facebook has no legal obligation to crack down on) they actually started doing it (somewhat but not as far as some people would like them to).

 

So outrage when companies do things which are legal but deemed bad by the general public, things do actually happen (sometimes).

 

I don't think we should pretend like it's raining when companies do horrible things just because "it's human nature for companies to be horrible and therefore we shouldn't say anything about it". If people aren't allowed to react negatively to bad things being done then the companies won't even have any intensive at all to stop doing them.

 

 

This reminds me of another thread we had earlier where some companies were being sued for using cobalt mined through child labor. Legally, the companies did nothing wrong (I don't think, the verdict isn't out yet). By the logic that "it's futile to be outraged at companies and we should all be silent unless they do something illegal", nobody in that thread should have said anything negative about those companies.

Did they profit from child labor? Yes, but they did it in a legal way, and since they are companies that's what we should expect from them, right? No point in demanding that a human becomes a bird, right?

[mr moose]

47 minutes ago, MegaDave91 said:

What's wrong with that?

 

 

Nothing.

 

37 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

Well it seems like it is actually working.

For example when people complained to Facebook that they shouldn't allow anti-vaxxers or things like "bleach enemas cures autism" (which I should all, Facebook has no legal obligation to crack down on) they actually started doing it (somewhat but not as far as some people would like them to).

 

So outrage when companies do things which are legal but deemed bad by the general public, things do actually happen (sometimes).

 

I don't think we should pretend like it's raining when companies do horrible things just because "it's human nature for companies to be horrible and therefore we shouldn't say anything about it". If people aren't allowed to react negatively to bad things being done then the companies won't even have any intensive at all to stop doing them.

 

 

This reminds me of another thread we had earlier where some companies were being sued for using cobalt mined through child labor. Legally, the companies did nothing wrong (I don't think, the verdict isn't out yet). By the logic that "it's futile to be outraged at companies and we should all be silent unless they do something illegal", nobody in that thread should have said anything negative about those companies.

Did they profit from child labor? Yes, but they did it in a legal way, and since they are companies that's what we should expect from them, right? No point in demanding that a human becomes a bird, right?

I think you might be over analyzing my comments.   Of course it works,  backlash can cause change, but also sometimes it doesn't. 

[Trik'Stari]

7 hours ago, StDragon said:

The whispers in the night, far away from neighbors that would otherwise stab them in the back. My God! Is that what we want, an erosion of free speech to where Big Tech becomes an instrument of a new Stasi like form of oppression?

 

To hell with Youtube! Bunch of cowering gutless cowards!

That is precisely the goal here.

 

It's long past time that these "platforms" either be held to the same standards as a publisher, if they want to behave as such, or be required to abide freedom of speech if they want to behave as a platform and enjoy the benefits of being a platform.

 

It's also long past time for our government to take action against companies doing the bidding of governments like that of China. Normally I dislike government interfering with any business, but if another government is going to interfere with that business in a way that negatively effects the rest of us, or attempt to manipulate us through that business, then we have no choice but to get our government to step in.

 

As to how badly our government will no doubt f**k it up? Hard to predict. 

[marldorthegreat]

11 hours ago, Var_ said:

YouTube is secretly gathering data for the Chinese government. Ask Dennis, he knows all about it

Erm, pretty sure he is from Taiwan, which is not (Well depending who you ask) part of china. 

 

Edit: 
Not part of the "Peoples Republic of China" but is recognised by the West as the "Republic of China", who both claim they are the legitimate government of China.

[foldingNoob]

I dismiss the "private platform" argument in this way. Sure the law allows them to censor, and in some ways you do want some censorship. I don't want to see ISIS beheading videos or any kind of cruelty. However banning certain words is violating the philosophical idea that is "free speech". The platform is not just a business, it's also an institution. An institution that can have a lot of influence over how you see the world. Everyone draws a line somewhere, but that line does not have to be what the current law defines.

 

We all know about the language control that is a major theme of Orwell's 1984. In the real world it is observed in Robert Lifton's book on totalitarianism where he interviewed people in the '50s that escaped from the mainland China. You can get a summary on wikipedia and I recommend everyone read it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Reform_and_the_Psychology_of_Totalism

[foldingNoob]

5 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

The existence of a dictatorship is derogatory, should we just delete china?

China's weakness is Winnie the Pooh memes.

It is illegal for mainland chinese to read this:

Quote

“A day without a friend is like a pot without a single drop of honey left inside.”
—Winnie the Pooh

 

[spartaman64]

31 minutes ago, marldorthegreat said:

Erm, pretty sure he is from Taiwan, which is not (Well depending who you ask) part of china. 

 

Edit: 
Not part of the "Peoples Republic of China" but is recognised by the West as the "Republic of China", who both claim they are the legitimate government of China.

china: taiwan is part of china 

taiwan: china is part of taiwan which is the real china

though some of the younger generation me included do consider them separate countries and have no desire for reunification 

[WambleCropped]

6 hours ago, suicidalfranco said:

Youtube bends the knee to china

Valve bends the knee to china

Apple bends the knee to china

Disney bends the knee to china

Google wants to bend the knee to china but has been cockblocked twice in the attempt

 

Just soulless spineless corporations without a shred of morality.

Fuck China and their Supreme Leader Winnie The Pooh

You forgot Blizzard

[sof006]

Happening in error... Uh-huh okay Google.

[RejZoR]

15 hours ago, Arika S said:

YouTube comments are cancer anyway

True. Except for CrazyRussianHacker. Comments there are always wholesome and funny

[williamcll]

5 hours ago, foldingNoob said:

China's weakness is Winnie the Pooh memes.

It is illegal for mainland chinese to read this:

 

Oddly enough in Shanghai:

I guess it only applies in some places but not everywhere. My own personal observation seems to be that Pewdiepie and DDLC got unbanned, replaced with Davie504 instead because he was a supporter of the protests/riots in Hong Kong.

[foldingNoob]

27 minutes ago, williamcll said:

Oddly enough in Shanghai:

Disney must be getting a pass for all the compliance work they do in their films. Maybe it only relates to internet posts/memes.

[Touch My Hamm]

appeasing one of the biggest money making markets in the world like most other companies. This is the new normal, we have to thank almost every country willing to have all manufacturing done in China to thank for this. Purchasing power is a huge thing and whoever has the people to spend the money at that level will decide the rules. 

 

/shrug unless things change we will see this more and more till every big retailer/website/entertainment will bow to the Chinese market since they spend the most and make the companies the most money. 

 

honestly im surprised it doesnt remove videos criticizing the Chinese government or at least have a youtube version meant only for china where it blocks that content and moderates the comments. Maybe this was a security feature for this version that accidentally got turned on for global versions?

[Sauron]

17 hours ago, dizmo said:

It's an automatic algorithm. So, if that is indeed a derogatory term, then it makes sense that it's filtered out. The system just looks at things that are considered derogatory and acts on them. If this was a person intervening and kicking the comments off, then it'd be worse.

I've seen much worse than this in youtube comments so I doubt this is the case. It's not a person intervening, it's just an automated filter, that doesn't mean this particular phrase wasn't intentionally inserted in the system.

[poochyena]

18 hours ago, dizmo said:

It's an automatic algorithm. So, if that is indeed a derogatory term, then it makes sense that it's filtered out. The system just looks at things that are considered derogatory and acts on them. If this was a person intervening and kicking the comments off, then it'd be worse.

 

I'd only really say this is a bad move if they uphold it now that they're made aware. Let's be real, I'm betting most of Google's employees aren't well versed in Mandarin/Cantonese. Saying that it's a conspiracy is a little much.

THANK YOU

And not only that, it seems like a comment thats being spammed. So any phrase that gets repeatedly spammed by many people will likely end up on a filter list.

[mr moose]

9 hours ago, foldingNoob said:

I dismiss the "private platform" argument in this way. Sure the law allows them to censor, and in some ways you do want some censorship. I don't want to see ISIS beheading videos or any kind of cruelty. However banning certain words is violating the philosophical idea that is "free speech". The platform is not just a business, it's also an institution. An institution that can have a lot of influence over how you see the world. Everyone draws a line somewhere, but that line does not have to be what the current law defines.

 

We all know about the language control that is a major theme of Orwell's 1984. In the real world it is observed in Robert Lifton's book on totalitarianism where he interviewed people in the '50s that escaped from the mainland China. You can get a summary on wikipedia and I recommend everyone read it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Reform_and_the_Psychology_of_Totalism

Freedom of speech is not guaranteed in most countries, and in the US it is a constitutional right for specific purposes.  It is not based on any philosophical merits but founded on the right of individuals to criticize government and not be punished for it. Moving just beyond that,  there is also a huge difference between freedom of speech and compelled speech.  One is the ability to say what you want, the other is being forced to either say yourself or support someone else saying something you disagree with.  Compelled speech is draconian, dictatorial and reprehensible in every way.    This is not a free speech issue, but it certainly is starting to become a compelled speech issue when people think they can force a private company to platform a view they disagree with.

 

2 hours ago, poochyena said:

THANK YOU

And not only that, it seems like a comment thats being spammed. So any phrase that gets repeatedly spammed by many people will likely end up on a filter list.

 

But that is not the case, there are many repeated derogatory comments that are not filtered or on any filter list.   While there are other examples of derogatory speech in youtube comments the existence of one that automatically deletes can only be the result of being specifically targeted.

 

 

[ouroesa]

I just tried this and my comment was not deleted for around 5mins after which I manually deleted it. Have they changed this already?

[Trik'Stari]

16 hours ago, jagdtigger said:

The existence of a dictatorship is derogatory, should we just delete the Chinese government?

Ftfy?

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, ouroesa said:

I just tried this and my comment was not deleted for around 5mins after which I manually deleted it. Have they changed this already?

Maybe this is all a storm in a teacup.  It does seem to be a growing trend to treat every little observation on the internet as the end of the world.

[niofalpha]

I don't understand why people think that the Chinese government would force Google to ban these two insults, but keep all the comments and videos about Hong Kong protests up.

 

Is common sense dead, or is the propaganda just that effective?

[Bombastinator]

5 minutes ago, niofalpha said:

I don't understand why people think that the Chinese government would force Google to ban these two insults, but keep all the comments and videos about Hong Kong protests up.

 

Is common sense dead, or is the propaganda just that effective?

There has been coverage in western media of the Chinese government banning a lot of dogwhistle terms. “Winnie the Pooh” was one that was described.  According to media coverage it is a veiled reference to the Chinese prime minister because of his soft and stooped posture.  It’s a way of talking about him negatively and covertly.  
 

I see your point though.  I personally have seen a lot of propaganda use in the United States being fantastically effective lately.  People are people after all.  Control the data that goes in and you can control the thought coming out. No human is immune and the more they think they are immune the less they are.