PragerU sues Youtube for Discrimination.

Probably a case could be made that if you are going to run a "Open to the Public Forum" the Rules you put in place should be put in a more DEFINITIVE Way so as be sure what IS and ISN'T allowed. But then Google is Extreme Leftist in its Policies so yeah...FAIRNESS will never be a Thing with them.

Indeed.

Let's not pretend it's social media for everyone, and then exlude some points of view just coz we can.

Mabye just to be fair Youtube should give it self a Selection of Sites. Like instead of "Red Tube" being their TV Side. that could be the place for their RIGHT posters and Blue Tube for the Left. Just to be fair and so the IGNORANT Public will know which site it is OK for them to visit. Just so the "Easily OFFENDED" won't accidentally watch something they SHOULDN'T!

Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]Mabye just to be fair Youtube should give it self a Selection of Sites. Like instead of "Red Tube" being their TV Side. that could be the place for their RIGHT posters and Blue Tube for the Left. Just to be fair and so the IGNORANT Public will know which site it is OK for them to visit. Just so the "Easily OFFENDED" won't accidentally watch something they SHOULDN'T! [/B]

I would have a better chance at starting FlyTube.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
i'm all for this as it applies to the giants like YT/twitter/FB, etc, but i hope nobody expects an establishment of special rules designed to empower the right. they're basically filing suit against the very practice that helped put trump in the whitehouse. (circlejerking over the validity of misinformation-reporting while mass-reporting and deleting opposing opinions/articles)

People mostly just want them to stop having rules designed to empower the left or to silence the right.

Maybe even people at YT not manipulating the trending list would be a valid thing to want to end as well.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
i won't even take your activist blog news with a pinch of salt. if you have no time to post valid sources then i have no time to waste reading your aids-media links.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-rebel/

What was the problem? The site has a "mixed" factual reporting rating. Same as CNN. Would you have reacted the same way if the link was from CNN?

Originally posted by Stigma
The story itself is interesting because, even if shyly, it touches upon the issue of freedom of speech.

On the one hand I guess that private companies can do whatever they want (to put it in the bluntest terms possible), on the other, I am sure there are some legislative rules to prevant such discrimination even at that level, no?

Would the same rules that define a "public service" apply?

A private forum is one thing, a public commons like Youtube is another.

Originally posted by Flyattractor
[b]Mabye just to be fair Youtube should give it self a Selection of Sites. Like instead of "Red Tube" being their TV Side. that could be the place for their RIGHT posters and Blue Tube for the Left. Just to be fair and so the IGNORANT Public will know which site it is OK for them to visit. Just so the "Easily OFFENDED" won't accidentally watch something they SHOULDN'T! [/B]

Yeah. forgot about that site. Bet that really burned Youtubes Balls when they couldn't use it for their site.