alabaster_punt

Further to my original comment, as you can see, bringing this up results in your comment being flagged while other users freely go about spreading racist rhetoric. Just a few days ago I had a "discussion" with a user who drew an equivalence between "black lives matter" and an honest to goodness white nationalist slogan, and when I challenged this, mumbled about the ADL's "agenda". Guess who got flagged?

Do you see how absurd it is to present an anti-racist slogan and a racist slogan as equivalent? Your logical contortions require the removal of all context from the discussion. Context is important. In this case, the context is that the overwhelming majority of this phrase's usage is as a white nationalist slogan. You're deliberately ignoring this in an incredible attempt to paint anti-racist activists as equivalent to racist activists.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and congratulate you on falling for the con.

I have to wonder why you're so determined to defend a phrase coined by neo-nazis, used by the Ku Klux Klan and other known white nationalists, and whether or not you have a bias of your own.

One of them was a reaction to a well-evidenced trend of excessive police force against black people. The other one is literally a neo-nazi dog whistle intended to promote the theory that there is a conspiracy against white people in western society and draw well meaning white people into nazi ideology. I'm not biased on this point, I simply know the facts. I suggest you read the ADL's coverage of it, and similarly "think really hard". https://www.adl.org/blog/from-4chan-another-trolling-campaig...

Are you suggesting "It's OK to be white" isn't a dogwhistle?

> 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.

If you have a specific reason to believe that the model resulted in an incorrect conclusion, feel free to share it, instead of casting aspersions with cryptic nothings.

> Which is why it's important that we present the truth right next to it, so people don't have to look elsewhere.

This still assumes that people will be willing to watch it.

> Well, it is available, in places where the truth isn't available, so I don't really know what you think taking it off YouTube has achieved.

It has achieved a lower spread of misinformation. Now nobody browsing YouTube will happen upon this video by chance and start believing something that is false and dangerous. Of course, those who are already embedded in these communities will still be able to access the information elsewhere. It is not a perfect solution, I don't think there is a perfect solution, but it does reduce the impact.

What's dangerous about it is that it's encouraging people to demand that their government enact policies that will lead to unnecessary deaths.

Neil Ferguson's model was not flawed (at least, not in a significant way that would invalidate its conclusions)

Sakora is the latter, and the problem with this viewpoint is publishing the truth elsewhere doesn't stop people from absorbing the lies here. Somebody consuming this content is not likely to seek out alternative viewpoints to correct themselves. The information is dangerous, it should not be available.

Hardly surprising that a video full of dangerous misinformation has been pulled. It would be worth reading about this particular professor on Wikipedia, particularly his support for alternative medicine, his false claim to have been a professor at Imperial college, and his claim that the UK's NHS is "the last bastion of communism". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karol_Sikora