Home | About | Donate

Journalist and Educator Among Those Caught Up in YouTube's Latest Attempt to Purge Online Hate Speech

Originally published at http://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/06/06/journalist-and-educator-among-those-caught-youtubes-latest-attempt-purge-online-hate

From the article:

“Do these elements make them a public square, worthy of free speech rights for users?”

Is that a trick question? Of course it does. Besides which, there’s no Constitutional right not to be offended.


From the article: “Fischer’s case as a prime example of why actions like YouTube’s purge are always destined to hurt those who don’t deserve it.”

Who is to say Fischer is one of “Those who didn’t deserve it?” Who is the arbiter of what is and what is not hate speech? Reporting on people you hate, or because you hate what they say–presenting their existence as a threat to others… is just instigating hate against hate.

Ergo it’s hate speech. QED Basically he got caught in what he was advocating. How about EVERYBODY stop trying to tell other people what they can and can not say?

I don’t like hate speech, but I’d rather see and hear the person saying it so I know who it is. Rather than shutting them down and having to guess.

1 Like

“It’s absolutely vital that YouTube work to undo the damage caused by their indiscriminate implementation as soon as possible.”

It’s absolutey vital that we builld a better internet.

De-Google the Internet

List of radical servers

1 Like

Policing hate speech only drives it underground. Even if somehow implemented in a perfect way that only targets “real” hate, it is not a solution. Hate is a symptom of something else.


Note that the most effective hate speech on the modern internet is often highly-coded. Triple parentheses, Green frogs, “red pills”, “OK” hand signs, the “4-chan” logo, and “kekistan flag”, saying something then claiming they didn’t say it (Jordan Peterson, Pewdepie) or claiming that they are “just joking” and the offended persons are just “triggered snowflakes” who cant get a joke.

The effectiveness of such code language is apparent in these YouTube personalities who, for reasons that are perplexing to an outsider, gather a huge number of neofascist subscribers and commenters. Typical examples are Jordan Peterson, Pewdepie, and even this seemingly totally innocent Japanese guy’s vlog “Find Your Love in Japan” that I blundered into. Other signs are when you visit a site of a seemingly innocent speaker (Jordan Peterson exhorting his all-male followers to “clean their room”), you start to find, neofascists in the “recommended videos”. The Alphabet Corporation/Google/Youtube algorithm itself is clever enough to sniff out the code language and followership.

And hate speech seems to be pretty obvious to me. It is anything that would be obviously insulting and reasonably expected to provoke a physical altercation if uttered in the presence of discriminated or historically discriminated minority that is the topic of the speech - including coded or dog-whistle speech. Such speech falls under the “fighting words” or “Fire in a crowded theater” exclusion from First Amendment protection.

So sorry, many millions of people were murdered the last time fascism arose, and millions more died bravely fighting it. There is no “free speech” protection for fascists - because the whole propose of fascism is to gain power so they can not only end freedom of speech, but the freedom to even exist of you are nonwhite, nonstraight, non-gender-normal.

But it’s the fascists who hold power who are going to enforce any such “hate speech” laws. eg. the Israelis who are turning BDS into hate speech, blocking it’s support on campuses and making it illegal in multiple jurisdictions.

So, no.