I don’t get the “Google is private property and can do what it wants” attitude. Sure, YouTube is owned by them. However, these services are becoming defacto monopoly utilities, and are increasingly essential to doing business in the modern economy. They should no more be allowed to drive an agenda by ideological exclusion than a private monopoly power company should be allowed to withhold power service to the headquarters of the DNC or the offices of GLAD. After all, the power grid is private property.

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
I don’t get the “Google is private property and can do what it wants” attitude. Sure, YouTube is owned by them. However, these services are becoming defacto monopoly utilities, ...

Some of us are only pointing out the howling and gnashing of teeth over Youtube's or Facebook's or Twitter's or what-have-you's actions are no different than the actions ISPs can take to advance their own social or economic agenda, being as "private property, y'all."

Same with the banks, credit card processors, you name it.

This is where we enter the "Well, yeah, it is private property, but..." zone. Where libertarianism and socialism collide.

If they wish to continue to advance an anti - whatever agenda, then the best weapon is to out them on their actions or create an alternative outlet.

Sure they are monster companies, and it would be hard, but the more they censor people the more apparent it becomes that information from anyone on utoob, fakebook or tweakers is not to be trusted regardless if you are left or right.

Like the mainstream media, most Americans feel that the national news outlets are tainted, thus reducing the power of those in charge of the agenda, censoring people for no good reason upsets everyone.

At least it should, because its a two way street.

If they can censor 2A people, who's to say that at some point they start censoring other agenda items.

quote:

Originally posted by DMF:a short time later the channel is up and running again, and it turns out the reasons for it was something other than the original alleged agenda.

Plausible however, given the climate it's not a stretch to believe a nefarious agenda is at work. It wouldn't take much for an engineer who's in charge of scrubbing content and channels to blank what they don't like, only to have their manager to come over with a memo, turn these back on list.

Just start moving content over to Vemeo or, another video platform.

In their new rules about gun channels it said something about not allowing videos showing disassembly, or modification of firearms. I'd imagine that Brownells does all that in it's videos. Since youtube has "suddenly" made these rule changes they are striking accounts based on past videos prior to the rule change.

Yes, they are a private company and can do what they want but that does not mean they are not shithead schmucks who are targeting what they consider to be "bad" content.

quote:

Originally posted by sigcrazy7:
I don’t get the “Google is private property and can do what it wants” attitude. Sure, YouTube is owned by them. However, these services are becoming defacto monopoly utilities, and are increasingly essential to doing business in the modern economy. They should no more be allowed to drive an agenda by ideological exclusion than a private monopoly power company should be allowed to withhold power service to the headquarters of the DNC or the offices of GLAD. After all, the power grid is private property.

What can be done, regulation? In today's climate that doesn't seem possible. Google is 'allowed' to do whatever it wants, who is to prevent them, the 'government?' In the future, there will be less choice, not more (AT&T Time Warner merger, etc). Large corporations already control the Internet and that isn't going to change any time soon, if ever.

The channel is now back up.

quote:

The channel is now back up.

seems like this could be a good time for the wealthy entrepeneur class to take a look at another revenue stream potential in a large market willing to consider competition to current providers.

quote:

Originally posted by signewt:
seems like this could be a good time for the wealthy entrepeneur class to take a look at another revenue stream potential in a large market willing to consider competition to current providers.

- dTube
- Daily Motion
- Vimeo
- Live Link
- Twitch

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:
Some of us are only pointing out the howling and gnashing of teeth over Youtube's or Facebook's or Twitter's or what-have-you's actions are no different than the actions ISPs can take to advance their own social or economic agenda, being as "private property, y'all."

Same with the banks, credit card processors, you name it.

This is where we enter the "Well, yeah, it is private property, but..." zone. Where libertarianism and socialism collide.

This is why every effort should be made to end the monopolies of the big cable companies. Old outdated legislation put in place to limit the competition of these companies need to be repealed allowing more options for the consumer.

Don't like how Comcast treats your bits? Then go over to their competitor.