Re:YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel
by casefields on Monday January 11, 2021 @07:31AM
(#25728032)
If they've been convicted in a court of law for incitement, then many of us wouldn't have much of a problem.
Re:YouTube bans Steve Bannon's podcast channel
by Artistry121 on Monday January 11, 2021 @08:49AM
(#25728806)
No company or individual should have to carry rhetoric inciting violence until a court of law engages. Responsibility is not solely on the courts - corporations and people can make decisions on what is right without courts.
Especially when the person is obviously saying it -“behead Fauci”.
Bannon has a way to get his message out - he has his own media organization.
Many people don’t feel like what Bannon is doing is right and don’t need a court of law to tell them. Courts of law defended slavery - people made decisions prior to the courts interference to change that.
Small government requires the ability of private groups to choose their own moral stances.
If they incite violence perhaps they will
>I believe flagging and moderation and proscribing individual videos is better than banning channels outright and deplatforming.
That may indeed be a better course of action, though when you have habitual offenders, in this case bannons channel got 4 warnings, its a huge burden on you to keep checking each and every video, and the violence gets incited while you spend time checking.