LTT keeps skirting the problems with google's censorship of gun channels.

[IRMacGuyver]

The WAN show the other week they mentioned it a bit in the context of channels asking if Floatplane would be a valid haven for gun content  Several of the channels hurt the most by these restrictions are actual history shows.  The actual dangerous channels like demolition ranch make plenty off merch to not need youtube ad money.  I understand Forgotten Weapons hasn't found much success on the platform.  Google's censorship is so bad that they block guns from their shopping tab even though guns are completely legal to own and have actual real world uses for hunting or self protection in rural areas with dangerous animals.  The animal thing becoming more and more of a problem lately as cities expand ever further into wild habitats.  Shouldn't such censorship of technology be more of a priority for a technology channel? 

[AbydosOne]

Quote

google's censorship of gun channels

Google is private company. Private companies have no obligation to treat all customers/users the same, outside of certain protected classes. Content about/including guns is not a protected class.

[Lurking]

What censorship? They just elect to not sell guns... So does my grocery store. Plenty of opportunities for you to buy guns. 

 

I like " forgotten weapons". How is he censored? I'm not subscribed, but his videos get suggested to  me. And I'm 100% not looking for guns, so the algorithm sure will suggest it to people who are interested.

[starsmine]

How hands on and how much google would essentially have to editorialize gun content is just way to much work. Without direct editorial discretion and direction, gun content is just safer to algorithmically nuke. Once they start building a white list of gun content you start to really skirt the edge of what is allowed with section 230 and lose its protections as well. Gun content is not worth losing that protection. The content isn't banned, its just deprioritized, you can still host your content on the site, but you need sponsors and outside traffic.

Failing to put ads on the videos (from companies that request, DO NOT PUT ADS ON GUN VIDEOS) is not censorship. It exists in the library, and is fully searchable, its just not putting it out in front. 

Why you think google should be forced to sell guns is weird to me. 

I have zero idea what you are talking about with animals, it does not even sound tangential. You dont need a youtube video to teach you how to use a .308 or a 12 gauge if you are worried about bears or wolves on your land. Or advertise some weird shit you dont actually need. 

[vf1000ride]

3 hours ago, Lurking said:

What censorship? They just elect to not sell guns... So does my grocery store. Plenty of opportunities for you to buy guns. 

 

I like " forgotten weapons". How is he censored? I'm not subscribed, but his videos get suggested to  me. And I'm 100% not looking for guns, so the algorithm sure will suggest it to people who are interested.

Not sure it's about the selling of guns as that is 100% banned on youtube but from what I have seen many youtube channels have been given strikes for what would seem very simple things.  Channels are getting strikes for showing the act of putting a loaded magazine in a gun.  Shooting more than 20 rounds from a gun in one take.  Threading a legally owned suppressor onto the barrel.  Mounting a flashlight or scope will get your video pulled.

 

One of the biggest problems is that they don't have a written list of what the rules are and they make up rules to ban/punish content creators for what seems like random or innocuous acts.  

[Lurking]

43 minutes ago, vf1000ride said:

Not sure it's about the selling of guns as that is 100% banned on youtube but from what I have seen many youtube channels have been given strikes for what would seem very simple things.  Channels are getting strikes for showing the act of putting a loaded magazine in a gun.  Shooting more than 20 rounds from a gun in one take.  Threading a legally owned suppressor onto the barrel.  Mounting a flashlight or scope will get your video pulled.

 

One of the biggest problems is that they don't have a written list of what the rules are and they make up rules to ban/punish content creators for what seems like random or innocuous acts.  

That isn't necessarily a conspiracy, it is just CYA on YT side. Keep in mind, every minute a few ten thousand hours of video are uploaded. Lot of simpel rules and AI to guard the system. i used to follow a Polish biking channel and of course, it was just about bikes. But all of sudden YT decided to ban his channel and he couldn't figure out why. not sure how he got it back, but he eventually did. So these are just flukes in the system and for guns everything likely is more sensitive than bikes. 

 

And it isn't censorship. The creator can create their own site and publish whatever they like inc. politics and religion. You just can't force a private company to do it for you. Like I can't go to Fox News and force them to publish my side of a story. But I'm allowed to do it myself (with my own means). I'm not censored, I'm just not given the (privately owned) tools to publish. Or I can't force Amazon to publish my book, but I legally can self-publish. 

 

I never even realized there is selling on YT. You mean ads? I block them anyway. So I'm censoring myself  

[vf1000ride]

6 minutes ago, Lurking said:

That isn't necessarily a conspiracy, it is just CYA on YT side. Keep in mind, every minute a few ten thousand hours of video are uploaded. Lot of simpel rules and AI to guard the system. i used to follow a Polish biking channel and of course, it was just about bikes. But all of sudden YT decided to ban his channel and he couldn't figure out why. not sure how he got it back, but he eventually did. So these are just flukes in the system and for guns everything likely is more sensitive than bikes. 

 

And it isn't censorship. The creator can create their own site and publish whatever they like inc. politics and religion. You just can't force a private company to do it for you. Like I can't go to Fox News and force them to publish my side of a story. But I'm allowed to do it myself (with my own means). I'm not censored, I'm just not given the (privately owned) tools to publish. Or I can't force Amazon to publish my book, but I legally can self-publish. 

 

I never even realized there is selling on YT. You mean ads? I block them anyway. So I'm censoring myself  

The only problem with your thinking is that some of these gun channels are not getting the takedowns reversed and they are having to proactively take down dozens if not hundreds of videos to prevent getting canceled over unwritten rules.  It's not just the AI pulling the videos but when they contact youtube they are being told they are in violation of these unwritten rules and to make sure they don't do it again or violate any of the other unwritten rules or they will be permanently kicked off the platform.  Most of the gun channel content creators that this is effecting make their living off these videos.  They don't do this for free and can't afford to lose their entire channel and content library or to just move to another platform because how are they going to generate revenue?

 

Imagine going to work and finding you got shorted on your paycheck.  You go to the boss and ask what happened and they tell you they docked your pay because you broke a company policy.  It's a company policy you are not allowed to read, they will not explain it to you fully, but then they threaten you to not break it again or any of the other policies you don't have access to or they will fire you.  Your gonna be upset and concerned for your job I would think.  It's the same concept.

[Lurking]

11 minutes ago, vf1000ride said:

The only problem with your thinking is that some of these gun channels are not getting the takedowns reversed and they are having to proactively take down dozens if not hundreds of videos to prevent getting canceled over unwritten rules.  It's not just the AI pulling the videos but when they contact youtube they are being told they are in violation of these unwritten rules and to make sure they don't do it again or violate any of the other unwritten rules or they will be permanently kicked off the platform.  Most of the gun channel content creators that this is effecting make their living off these videos.  They don't do this for free and can't afford to lose their entire channel and content library or to just move to another platform because how are they going to generate revenue?

 

Imagine going to work and finding you got shorted on your paycheck.  You go to the boss and ask what happened and they tell you they docked your pay because you broke a company policy.  It's a company policy you are not allowed to read, they will not explain it to you fully, but then they threaten you to not break it again or any of the other policies you don't have access to or they will fire you.  Your gonna be upset and concerned for your job I would think.  It's the same concept.

That work example isn't applicable. YT never hired the creators. They signed up to get paid based on ads or whatever. They will get paid for the time their channel was up and generated revenue. 

 

YT isn't responsible for providing a living. Youtubers also can get a regular job. YT isn't the only video market place. Or they can get their own servers etc. and have their own video platform. No one is preventing them from doing that. 

 

Like if I'm an artist and display art in an art galley to sell it and that is how make my living. Now the art gallery can say they like different artist and i have to go. I can't force them to like and display my art. But I can make my own art gallery, or sell my art via other ways. 

 

Imagine you own YT and then someone shows videos you don't like. Would you want to be forced to show them in your own company? If YT says tomorrow they only show flower videos, that is their business decision (probably a bad one, but their choice). 

[thrasher_565]

was there not a limit on 5 round mages? if so people are braking the ruls. probly started when there were thows 100 round drum mags on pistols

[vf1000ride]

41 minutes ago, Lurking said:

Like if I'm an artist and display art in an art galley to sell it and that is how make my living. Now the art gallery took and sold my art but say they like different artist and will not pay me the original agreed price so i have to go. I can't force them to like and display my art or pay me whats owed for previous artwork. But I can make my own art gallery, or sell my art via other ways. 

 

Here, fixed that statement for you.

[vf1000ride]

31 minutes ago, thrasher_565 said:

was there not a limit on 5 round mages? if so people are braking the ruls. probly started when there were thows 100 round drum mags on pistols

They dropped the round count to 20 rounds per mag if I am understanding it correctly.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

2 minutes ago, vf1000ride said:

Here, fixed that statement for you.

That’s not what’s being done?

 

Youtube isn’t stealing your video, you still own it

youtubw isn’t stealing wages

youtube doesn’t have to pay you shit unless it’s watched, and they can control what’s watched

[Lurking]

3 minutes ago, vf1000ride said:

Here, fixed that statement for you.

I'm pretty sure the creators got paid up to the day they got banned. If not, they can sue for the agreed on amount. Obviously not beyond that. Like if you get fired from a job, you still get paid to the day you get fired. And YYT is not showing those videos anymore, so YT is not profiting from the "art" anymore. 

[thrasher_565]

well to me it looks like they dont want negativity so that could be a reason. but they are a business and they do what they want. just so happen that you were able to make a living doing it but your not garanty it. 

 

there a channel called ZIP TIES N BIAS PLIES and threting to shut it down but in this case its clear why... i just wish they would shut down thows "saving animals videos...  no one wants to see a dog with broken feet sitting on the side of the road...

[Erioch]

2 minutes ago, thrasher_565 said:

i just wish they would shut down thows "saving animals videos...  no one wants to see a dog with broken feet sitting on the side of the road...

Especially since they create the problem for the animal in the first place.

[starsmine]

23 minutes ago, vf1000ride said:

They dropped the round count to 20 rounds per mag if I am understanding it correctly.

If you miss a mofo buck 20 times you dont need a gun, you need medical help. 

It is a very generous rule for youtube to have. 

people like Paul Harrell have a healthy youtube channel. While I'm sure people have had community strikes for seemingly innocuous things, some generic line needs to be drawn between informative and gun masturbation videos, and 20 rounds in a single mag is more then generous. There are zero shooting sports where you go that high that I am aware of, educational videos outside of autos dont need to go that high, and even when you use an auto, context is generally easy to establish when asked for a review. 

[thrasher_565]

8 minutes ago, starsmine said:

If you miss a mofo buck 20 times you dont need a gun, you need medical help. 

It is a very generous rule for youtube to have. 

people like Paul Harrell have a healthy youtube channel. While I'm sure people have had community strikes for seemingly innocuous things, some generic line needs to be drawn between informative and gun masturbation videos, and 20 rounds in a single mag is more then generous. There are zero shooting sports where you go that high that I am aware of, educational videos outside of autos dont need to go that high, and even when you use an auto, context is generally easy to establish when asked for a review. 

i dont see why you need more then that too... if you need to shoot that much then it should be shoot w/e you want at a gun range... imo

 

now i get it they dont just shoot at a target they do think like how many pcs will stop a 50 cal...

[mononymous]

Floatplane is also a private company therefore it is not privy to host all content. 

 

Again you don't have to choose floatplane. There are sites like odysee, pornhub to name a few that would host content that is not suitable for YouTube.

[vf1000ride]

So there are obviously folks in the thread that are ok with this censorship of legal activities so I'm done trying to argue on the behalf of the creators as I'm not one myself.  For anyone that is interested in learning more about the topic there are several good content creators that have made videos posting about the problems with youtube that you are more than welcome to go watch and see how the unwritten policies of the platform are affecting them.  Go searching for Forgotten Weapons, Guns&Gadgets, Johnny B, Mrgunsngear Channel, Military Arms Channel, InRange TV and sure there are more that all have content about platform censorship.

[starsmine]

27 minutes ago, vf1000ride said:

So there are obviously folks in the thread that are ok with this censorship of legal activities so I'm done trying to argue on the behalf of the creators as I'm not one myself.  For anyone that is interested in learning more about the topic there are several good content creators that have made videos posting about the problems with youtube that you are more than welcome to go watch and see how the unwritten policies of the platform are affecting them.  Go searching for Forgotten Weapons, Guns&Gadgets, Johnny B, Mrgunsngear Channel, Military Arms Channel, InRange TV and sure there are more that all have content about platform censorship.

No, there are people in this thread who know what the word censorship means. First amendment strictly only applies governmentally in the US. It does not for non governmental, or non US entities. Float plane is neither governmental, nor is it US.

and your first amendment (as well as all amendments) rights end where others begin, hence why terroristic and violent(which is not physical fyi) rhetoric does not fall under it and a few other exceptions. 

Also, I need to stress this with the strongest possible emphasis. Deplatforming is not censorship. Its simply not blasting it on a megaphone. The fact that Im not into weapons, and this happens, blows your argument out of the water. 

 

Again, you are asking for youtube to directly, by hand, editorialize. THATS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN so long as section 230 remains the way it is. Once they editorialize, they become a publisher, and good faith moderation will not be enough to protect them, so they will have to clamp down even harder in terms of who is allowed to upload. 

As for some of the others on your list, you are being facetious about why they may or may not be being clamped down on (they are not disproportionally). 
Ever notice the loudest people who claim about censorship are not being censored. yea. me to. its a grift. 

Generally advertisers do not want to advertise on unknown gun content, that is their right to choose to do that. And its wild that you think companies must be forced to put ads on that content. 

[seanondemand]

Your hobby is being censored not by a government, but by a company making a judgment call that a lot of content related to your hobby is objectionable enough to society that it’s not worth having on their platform. If you continue with the hobby despite what that fact says about it… well, I hope it’s fun for you. 

[Avocado Diaboli]

1 hour ago, vf1000ride said:

So there are obviously folks in the thread that are ok with this censorship of legal activities so I'm done trying to argue on the behalf of the creators as I'm not one myself. 

Porn is legal in the US. There's no porn on YouTube, they don't allow it. According to your reasoning, you must also conclude that YouTube should host porn as it's perfectly legal, right? And before you claim that this is outlined in the community guidelines whereas the lines around firearm content are a bit more blurry, again, you defend firearm content on the basis of legality here, not on the basis of community guidelines. If you want to force YouTube to offer everybody a platform, you'll have to campaign for it to become nationalized and funded by taxes.

 

This isn't about whether you or I or anyone is ok with censorship. It's just that this is the reality of how private industry works. Content platforms aren't a democracy.

[vf1000ride]

13 minutes ago, starsmine said:

No, there are people in this thread who know what the word censorship means. First amendment strictly only applies governmentally in the US. It does not for non governmental, or non US entities. Float plane is neither governmental, nor is it US.

and your first amendment (as well as all amendments) rights end where others begin, hence why terroristic and violent(which is not physical fyi) rhetoric does not fall under it and a few other exceptions. 

Also, I need to stress this with the strongest possible emphasis. Deplatforming is not censorship. Its simply not blasting it on a megaphone. The fact that Im not into weapons, and this happens, blows your argument out of the water

Censorship, not only my view of whats happening but would be a direct quote from any of the channels I mentioned above who are directly affected by it if you would like to watch their videos they can explain it better than I can.  I didn't stay at a holiday inn express last night so I can't claim to be a language or legal scholar.

 

Floatplane, I will admit I have not been able to watch a full Wan show episode in ages so not once have I mentioned it's content, policies, or talking point. I have stuck with youtube policy/content as I know a little more about that stuff.  I live in the US so as you point out I have no skin in the game as to how laws or businesses regulate stuff in Canada.

 

The next line about constitutional amendments is misconstrued and off topic and I just don't know what to tell you.  If anything in these videos was Illegal, the last thing the content creators would have to worry about was getting booted off youtube.  The government would have them cuffed and sitting in a jail cell.

 

Deplatforming, we can call it that if you want.  I still doesn't make the practice morally correct if you do it without a proper set of rules for the creators to follow and abide by. Yes youtube has the right to moderate content on it's platform but by changing the rules, never publishing the rules. "Deplatforming" or threatening to "Deplatform" creators who had been following the written rules by interjecting secret ones is just underhanded and unjust.

 

I google searched Forgotten, what is I assume your picture is meant to represent and had a good laugh as I don't get the same results even though I spend an inordinate amount of time consuming gun topics. 

[starsmine]

4 minutes ago, vf1000ride said:

I google searched Forgotten, what is I assume your picture is meant to represent and had a good laugh as I don't get the same results even though I spend an inordinate amount of time consuming gun topics. 

its a youtube search, we are talking about youtube. why would I search google intentionally for a youtube channel. 

[vf1000ride]

2 minutes ago, Avocado Diaboli said:

Porn is legal in the US. There's no porn on YouTube, they don't allow it. According to your reasoning, you must also conclude that YouTube should host porn as it's perfectly legal, right? And before you claim that this is outlined in the community guidelines whereas the lines around firearm content are a bit more blurry, again, you defend firearm content on the basis of legality here, not on the basis of community guidelines. If you want to force YouTube to offer everybody a platform, you'll have to campaign for it to become nationalized and funded by taxes.

 

This isn't about whether you or I or anyone is ok with censorship. It's just that this is the reality of how private industry works. Content platforms aren't a democracy.

Nope, porn is well written into the rules of what is not allowed on the platform. There is no hidden agenda to allow some porn but not other types on youtube.  I am upset about the double standard of having unwritten, hidden rules that you don't know your in violation of until they deplatform you.  If the written rules and community guidlines actually banned what they are deplatforming creators for doing than fine, there is no argument.

 

It's funny that some of the gun channels have actually moved their content to Pornhub as they are more accepting of the content than what youtube is.