I do. Also the negative publicity will be merciless. AJ doesn't warrant much negative publicity let's be honest. Probably loads celebrating....
To be fair to YouTube, they've shown leniency towards Alex Jones and InfoWars before. Last year, they started doing a crackdown on channels promoting conspiracy theories, and many got deleted. InfoWars did not get deleted. Not even their videos where Sandy Hook got called a hoax were deleted, and these are videos that caused harassment campaigns against bereaved families.
...and they'd be right if Momentum broke their terms.
It looks like you have not heard about Twitch. YouTube does not have monopoly.
What is this statistic ? Why is Netflix there , when they don't provide user upload of original content?Market share seems to paint a picture where YouTube is pretty much alone in terms of dominance. Competition doesn't mean that there are no other actors in the market, but that these actors actually compete.
Leading multimedia websites in the United States in November 2016, based on market share of visits
Telling that the only two other outlets who have more than a 1% market share aren't even video sharing sites! Surprised LiveLeak isn't on there, that used to be the place to watch stuff that was banned on YouTubeMarket share seems to paint a picture where YouTube is pretty much alone in terms of dominance. Competition doesn't mean that there are no other actors in the market, but that these actors actually compete.
Leading multimedia websites in the United States in November 2016, based on market share of visits
Not really, YouTube works, it's plugged into Google and your phone, and it's convenient. There's nothing stopping people from moving to any of the other services (dailymotion for example), maybe people will at some point.
( I wonder if it's to influence people who are not clued in or tech savvy and perhaps who are much more likely to vote) This is all politics and from my POV, he must return to youtube and if you don't want to watch him? Don't. But some people choose to be offended for a whole host of reasons. Oh and check out the alex jones indie song which is really goodNo. Here's the thing. People can say he's a nut and deserves to be censored but prove to anyone he's not playing a role for the sole purpose of introducing censorship and you can't and therefore it's a dangerous route to go down JUST because you believe he's this or that (it means you take things at face value). Because then you are being herded like sheep down a certain interlectual path that don't HAVE to be true.... If you follow politics or know much the CIA coined the term conspiracy theorist. By definition in 2018, if you ask a question that is not supported by the mainstream, that is what you are. It's dangerous to be put under an umbrella because it allows for generalization. YouTube and the like talk about 'hate speech', but this is all politically motivated. People don't get that when you have big corporations financing people trying to get into government, then THAT by it's nature IS a conspiracy. And likewise if a government was in control how can it ever be in debt and what is the purpose of any government to be in debt? It can only ever be to influence policy. Especially when you had a time whereby governments could create money interest free. It seems almost stupid to put debt on yourself unless there is a reason people are not told. But Corporations don't pay big money, for zero influence. It's bad business. So I think you can look at this from multiple perspectives rather then one. The foundation for me is the credibility of the man. Is he legitimate OR was his purpose to be seen as crazy as to create this snowball effect? When you legitimize something then you accept the notion of censorship PERIOD but isn't it funny? You have the dark web...where people can hire someone to commit murder say...or to buy drugs and that's not censored and that don't cause outrage...and yet you get the media thinking Alex Jones is the biggest threat?
He wasn't censored by YouTube, his channel was deleted for repeatedly breaking the T&C they agreed to. YouTube's been incredibly lenient with him and InfoWars, and the deletion was long overdue.No. Here's the thing. People can say he's a nut and deserves to be censored but prove to anyone he's not playing a role for the sole purpose of introducing censorship and you can't and therefore it's a dangerous route to go down JUST because you believe he's this or that (it means you take things at face value). Because then you are being herded like sheep down a certain interlectual path that don't HAVE to be true.... If you follow politics or know much the CIA coined the term conspiracy theorist. By definition in 2018, if you ask a question that is not supported by the mainstream, that is what you are. It's dangerous to be put under an umbrella because it allows for generalization. YouTube and the like talk about 'hate speech', but this is all politically motivated. People don't get that when you have big corporations financing people trying to get into government, then THAT by it's nature IS a conspiracy. And likewise if a government was in control how can it ever be in debt and what is the purpose of any government to be in debt? It can only ever be to influence policy. Especially when you had a time whereby governments could create money interest free. It seems almost stupid to put debt on yourself unless there is a reason people are not told. But Corporations don't pay big money, for zero influence. It's bad business. So I think you can look at this from multiple perspectives rather then one. The foundation for me is the credibility of the man. Is he legitimate OR was his purpose to be seen as crazy as to create this snowball effect? When you legitimize something then you accept the notion of censorship PERIOD but isn't it funny? You have the dark web...where people can hire someone to commit murder say...or to buy drugs and that's not censored and that don't cause outrage...and yet you get the media thinking Alex Jones is the biggest threat?
I won't lie, seeing that wall of text put me of reading it. Do you have a TL/DR?
'Wake up, sheeple'.
OIC
Feck me I like this summary, almost convinced me to go back and read it, almost. The question marks were a master stroke.
The feck is this shit?No. Here's the thing. People can say he's a nut and deserves to be censored but prove to anyone he's not playing a role for the sole purpose of introducing censorship and you can't and therefore it's a dangerous route to go down JUST because you believe he's this or that (it means you take things at face value). Because then you are being herded like sheep down a certain interlectual path that don't HAVE to be true.... If you follow politics or know much the CIA coined the term conspiracy theorist. By definition in 2018, if you ask a question that is not supported by the mainstream, that is what you are. It's dangerous to be put under an umbrella because it allows for generalization. YouTube and the like talk about 'hate speech', but this is all politically motivated. People don't get that when you have big corporations financing people trying to get into government, then THAT by it's nature IS a conspiracy. And likewise if a government was in control how can it ever be in debt and what is the purpose of any government to be in debt? It can only ever be to influence policy. Especially when you had a time whereby governments could create money interest free. It seems almost stupid to put debt on yourself unless there is a reason people are not told. But Corporations don't pay big money, for zero influence. It's bad business. So I think you can look at this from multiple perspectives rather then one. The foundation for me is the credibility of the man. Is he legitimate OR was his purpose to be seen as crazy as to create this snowball effect? When you legitimize something then you accept the notion of censorship PERIOD but isn't it funny? You have the dark web...where people can hire someone to commit murder say...or to buy drugs and that's not censored and that don't cause outrage...and yet you get the media thinking Alex Jones is the biggest threat?
You know that one 'friend' who's smoked too much weed and thinks he has seen through the lies of the elite and now knows all the truths? Just imagine him rambling, and you've got it
Ok I'm sold, gonna read it when I've had a puff. I like those guys
