News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on Covid stats and policy. Parent comment

Re:YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on C... by kerkeslager on Thursday May 21, 2020 @12:49PM (#23260880)
> It has achieved a lower spread of misinformation.

Has it? I'm not really sure how you came to this conclusion.

If kicking Sakora off YouTube causes his followers to become angry and go share his personal site through a bunch of different channels, that could easily outpace the impact of a YouTube channel where refutations are included.

If someone censored your views, what would you do? Why do you think people who disagree with you won't do all the same things?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on C... by macintux on Thursday May 21, 2020 @01:54PM (#23262055)
YouTube is one of the largest disseminators of information in the world. No amount of small replacements with an existing audience of gullible fools can make up for the loss of audience of hundreds of millions of not-yet-introduced-to-this-garbage victims.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on C... by kerkeslager on Thursday May 21, 2020 @03:06PM (#23263404)
None of his videos are on this page[1]. The idea that just being on YouTube gets you an audience of "hundreds of millions" is completely false. In fact, I have friends who make great content that is lucky to hit 1000 views.

Meanwhile, Fox News is the most popular news network in America.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-viewed_YouTube_vi...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:YouTube removes interview with professor of medicine on C... by alabaster_punt on Thursday May 21, 2020 @03:14PM (#23263516)
> Has it? I'm not really sure how you came to this conclusion.

I explained in the comment you replied to. You seem to be deliberately ignoring that people who are not predisposed to the viewpoint could also be exposed. I do not believe that censoring on YouTube will prevent anyone who already believes this stuff from finding the content elsewhere, and I already admitted as such.

If two groups of people (those who actively seek the misinformation, and those who encounter it by chance) could access the misinformation, it stands to reason that preventing one of those groups from accessing the misinformation results in a lower overall spread of misinformation, even if the other group is unaffected.

[ Parent | on HN ]