|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Nov 30, 2010 16:50:49 GMT -5
I've not seen the video in question. Alex claims it's the helicopter thing in it? Is it or is it something else? Besides that, he's not the only one this stuff has happened to on Youtube. Leo Laporte got banned once and his show is a straight news/commentary show. He played some SNL clip that was tech related and got banned for it even though it was in the context of news/commentary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Nov 30, 2010 16:53:27 GMT -5
To be fair a) not everything Alex is saying about the situation is accurate and b) we haven't heard anything from Google/Youtube. Alex himself admits that Google has banned his site from the Google News section. Could it simply be that Google sees his site as a pure commentary site and not News? I'm sure his stuff still shows up in other google search results. I went to his site, cut the first few sentences of a random article and pasted them in google. I got his site as the very first result. As for the Youtube thing, we have no idea what the facts are, just Alex's side. That would make sense if there weren't thousands of blatantly unreputable websites that DO feed into the Google News section. For example, all of the fantasy football that I write goes into Google News, and most of that is complete speculation. At least the things that are posted on InfoWars generally have some sort of factual documentation provided with them. You can claim that he's going from Point A to Point Z on the subject, but it's every bit as reputable as some random guy's blog or my fantasy football articles. Also, we do know what the facts are about the Youtube thing because Alex has posted the document Google sent him in which he supposedly "didn't follow Community Guidelines." |
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Nov 30, 2010 17:00:52 GMT -5
To be fair a) not everything Alex is saying about the situation is accurate and b) we haven't heard anything from Google/Youtube. Alex himself admits that Google has banned his site from the Google News section. Could it simply be that Google sees his site as a pure commentary site and not News? I'm sure his stuff still shows up in other google search results. I went to his site, cut the first few sentences of a random article and pasted them in google. I got his site as the very first result. As for the Youtube thing, we have no idea what the facts are, just Alex's side. That would make sense if there weren't thousands of blatantly unreputable websites that DO feed into the Google News section. For example, all of the fantasy football that I write goes into Google News, and most of that is complete speculation. But is the site it's on a reputable site or not? For example, I can find an NY Times editorial on Google News on the TSA scanners. It's entirely speculative, but the NY Times is a reputable news source which is why the editorial shows up there. As I said earlier, Leo Laporte got banned for the same thing. Alex makes it sound like he's being "censored" when in fact he's being treated just like everyone else. Is it wrong for Youtube to pull his vid like that? Maybe. You can make that case for sure. Is he being treated any differently than anyone else? No. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Nov 30, 2010 17:08:04 GMT -5
BleacherReport, one of the sites I write for, is entirely community-written. You could go sign up there today and post "news." Because I'm one of their featured columnists, my articles receive precedence on the search engines and on their website, but that's a rare exception. I would venture to say that about 75% of the things posted on BleacherReport have zero credibility. It might be a fun read or an interesting topic, but for it to be called "News" is ridiculous. I even say that about most of my own articles. As I said earlier, Leo Laporte got banned for the same thing. Alex makes it sound like he's being "censored" when in fact he's being treated just like everyone else. Is it wrong for Youtube to pull his vid like that? Maybe. You can make that case for sure. Is he being treated any differently than anyone else? No. Oh I'm sure other people have been removed before for similar things. But this is a SPECIFIC incident in which the Alex Jones network posted about a five-second clip from a video as part of a longer video of their own. Then you look at other media outlets which have MUCH longer versions of the clip (some of the videos are ONLY this clip) and you have to ask yourself - "Why aren't these videos receiving the same treatment, or HARSHER treatment from Youtube?" |
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Nov 30, 2010 17:13:30 GMT -5
But like I said, Youtube does that kind of crap to everyone. It's not like they're singling Alex out though I'm sure he thinks that's what is happening.
|
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Nov 30, 2010 17:15:45 GMT -5
But like I said, Youtube does that kind of crap to everyone. It's not like they're singling Alex out though I'm sure he thinks that's what is happening. Yes they are. Alex posted video A. He gets taken down. CBS posts video B, which is a longer version of video A, nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Nov 30, 2010 17:17:36 GMT -5
But like I said, Youtube does that kind of crap to everyone. It's not like they're singling Alex out though I'm sure he thinks that's what is happening. Yes they are. Alex posted video A. He gets taken down. CBS posts video B, which is a longer version of video A, nothing. And the same thing happens to Leo Laporte when he posts a 30 second clip of SNL on his video podcast. Are they singling him out too? |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Nov 30, 2010 17:18:46 GMT -5
But like I said, Youtube does that kind of crap to everyone. It's not like they're singling Alex out though I'm sure he thinks that's what is happening. Yes they are. Alex posted video A. He gets taken down. CBS posts video B, which is a longer version of video A, nothing. Exactly. How is this NOT singling him out? Like I said, I'm not trying to say that this has never happened in the history of Youtube, but there are blatantly other videos from LARGER MEDIA SOURCES that are not taken down. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Nov 30, 2010 17:19:40 GMT -5
And the same thing happens to Leo Laporte when he posts a 30 second clip of SNL on his video podcast. Are they singling him out too? Are there other, longer versions of the same video on Youtube? If so, yes. He's being singled out as well. |
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Nov 30, 2010 17:28:39 GMT -5
And the same thing happens to Leo Laporte when he posts a 30 second clip of SNL on his video podcast. Are they singling him out too? Are there other, longer versions of the same video on Youtube? If so, yes. He's being singled out as well. No, he's not. Youtube just doesn't apply their policies uniformly like they should. Is it wrong of Youtube to apply their policies that way. Sure. Are they singling anyone out for persecution? No they're not. They're just incompetent. |
|
Captain d00m - Mr. 3000
Main Eventer
Bringing death and destruction since 2005!
Joined on: Dec 2, 2005 20:52:43 GMT -5
Posts: 3,376
|
Post by Captain d00m - Mr. 3000 on Nov 30, 2010 17:36:36 GMT -5
While it is true that youtube has a terrible policy (its affected my videos), it also seems like theyre singling him out. Ill make a remark when I know more about the situation.
|
|
|
|
Post by The UndyTaker on Nov 30, 2010 17:53:46 GMT -5
Don't really make sense. IF anything it just proves him and conspiracy theorist right. They keep sexual videos/racist/etc.. vids, but remove ones about the Government doing wrong. sounds fishy. Or they are removing it because they are tried of accidentally clicking on one and hearing some middle aged man bitch and moan about poop. They are clicking on wrestling review videos? |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Nov 30, 2010 19:19:19 GMT -5
No, he's not. Youtube just doesn't apply their policies uniformly like they should. Is it wrong of Youtube to apply their policies that way. Sure. Are they singling anyone out for persecution? No they're not. They're just incompetent. I'm pretty sure that's the definition of "Singling out." Alex is one of MANY offenders to this rule -- and the other offenders were way more blatant about their offense yet did not have their videos removed. Single Out -
pick out, select, or choose from a number of alternatives
This can apply to individuals or groups. Example: If a city police station sets up a speed trap in an area where MOST of the cars are speeding on a regular basis, then decides to only pull over one specific car, that is singling someone specific out from the group. If that same police station decides, "We're only going to pull over red cars," that is also singling out. While not ILLEGAL, it is certainly in bad taste and a pretty obvious example of them wanting to quiet the independent media sources that go against the norm. |
|
|
|
Post by King Shocker the Monumentous on Nov 30, 2010 19:24:02 GMT -5
Once Google finishes this mess, can they please find some way to stop Glenn Beck from brainwashing my mother?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lord Ragnarok on Dec 1, 2010 1:12:29 GMT -5
That's not right at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Dec 1, 2010 9:14:57 GMT -5
No, he's not. Youtube just doesn't apply their policies uniformly like they should. Is it wrong of Youtube to apply their policies that way. Sure. Are they singling anyone out for persecution? No they're not. They're just incompetent. I'm pretty sure that's the definition of "Singling out." Alex is one of MANY offenders to this rule -- and the other offenders were way more blatant about their offense yet did not have their videos removed. Single Out -
pick out, select, or choose from a number of alternatives
This can apply to individuals or groups. Example: If a city police station sets up a speed trap in an area where MOST of the cars are speeding on a regular basis, then decides to only pull over one specific car, that is singling someone specific out from the group. If that same police station decides, "We're only going to pull over red cars," that is also singling out. While not ILLEGAL, it is certainly in bad taste and a pretty obvious example of them wanting to quiet the independent media sources that go against the norm. Look. Google applies one standard to news outlets like CBS, CNN, NBC, etc..... Then they apply another standard to everyone else. Jones is in the "everyone else" standard. Is it right? No. Is he treated differently than anyone else in that category? No. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliquid on Dec 1, 2010 18:22:02 GMT -5
You Tube issued TheAlexJonesChannel a notice reversing its PREVIOUS DECISION to freeze the account. In the newest contact, You Tube writes that “Upon additional review we have reinstated the material and removed any penalties that had been applied to your account.” Only two days ago, YouTube responded to our counter-notification challenging the removal of a Wikileaks massacre video posted by literally hundreds of other media outlets by ruling to freeze our account. Now, thanks to outrage from our listeners and articles slamming the unfair ruling, You Tube has taken the rare and nearly unprecedented step of taking a second look, restoring the video and removing all penalties. Credit goes to You Tube for listening to our criticism. Ironically, though, even this reversal contains its own spin. Below the decision [see full letter below] is a message recommending that we “appeal the strike” in any future incidents we feel are unjust. However, this appeal process, known as a “DMCA counter-notification” is the exact venue we used to challenge the video’s original removal. It was when we DID appeal that You Tube ruled to freeze our account; the removal of the video itself was only a strike that would not have closed or frozen our account. UPDATE: Following the news that TheAlexJonesChannel would be frozen after it attempted to challenge the removal of its video posting of the Apache Helicopter video released through Wikileaks, YouTube contacted us AGAIN and reversed its decision, restoring the video following media criticism.  |
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Dec 1, 2010 19:06:24 GMT -5
well, this is both good and bad for alex jones.
|
|
