The YouTube purge

https://twitter.com/x/status/1133399691822030849
YouTube blocked ANNA News (Abkhazian Network News Agency) channel, the news agency reported on its website on May 28.

According to the ANNA News statement, the video channel was allegedly downed for “community guidelines” violations. No further details were provided.

A back-up YouTube channel of ANNA News can be found here. And in Russian.
ANNA News is the news agency of Abkhazian origin, which became known to an international audience thanks to its field reportages from Syria and eastern Ukraine.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1133365955130740739

Anna's latest vid, cleaned the house of lies within the Deep States narrative on so many levels.

 
I like watching YouTube videos, and like the variety of content, but I noticed YouTube likes to narrow the scope of it's content to 'what you like'.

And so for all the content available, YouTube wants to lock you into a narrow set of interests based on your video browsing activity. So, I end up with 4 or 5 interests with nothing but those related content and am left feeling there is nothing more to watch - but it is simply their coding/programming watching my activity, and serving up related content ad nauseum.

And I think this is parcel to - not just censorship - but molding and narrowing our social outlook to the minimum, while claiming their AI is helpful, only giving you what your browsing interests dictate; but doing so to a extreme, with the effect of censorship by channeling and surrounding your activity with more of the same.

So I go into 'incognito' mode, and the content that is served up reminds me of television.

So I think the censorship is more broad. And instead of singling people out, the goal is complete control and manipulation of what we watch. This would be a softer form of censorship: to contain it with itself.

So when you hear people talk about how AI is helpful in search engines, that is only a half truth because the effect is designed to narrow your scope instead of broadening it.
 
Another thought about demonetizing...

The web used to be an outlet for us to share interests, ideas, crafts ect., but now it is as if everything on the net is a commercial enterprise. And only when people are demonetized does the claim of censorship arise. What happened to the grass roots internet where people made a page or site out of fellowship, or just to connect and be helpful, or just build your own web interface? And if you did a web search, half of the results were personal, non-commercial websites?

I think it still exists, but was buried under the centralization of a 'over-web' - a Facebook, Twitter, and other social media ad schemes that made web interaction easy. And so, with web interfaces made-easy, people just get on and post pictures, post thoughts, ect. But only through a corporate interface. And who knows what they do with the content you entrust them to make available on the web?

The point is, people are dependent on them. And it is out of laziness or ignorance. Web coding is easy to understand, but tech companies babelize their code and the average person thinks it is beyond their scope. So, what was once easy has become usurpt into corporate hands and the web is all about retail/commercial interests. And we are their underlings, and call demonetization censorship.

It's as if social media became so big, the masses worship it. Because it gives them a avenue to post their recipes, or other consumerist minutia, even speaking out against it - empowers it further. Because what was once simple and coherent, corporate interests have babelized, and made it hard to interface with the web without their help.

So, we need to go back to the pre-social media time and learn to interface with the web so that we don't need big corporations holding our hands.

The anti-youtube, Facebook, Google movements are only highlighting their power. If you denounce something and not offer an alternative, you are doing just that - empowering them. And so if you see a bunch of anti groups being 'anti', but not 'pro' anything they are probably shills acting to empower that which they claim to be against.

Another thing, we can't go against a organizational structure with the intent on replacing it. We can only do without it. Without social media, we would still have the web. Social media has become a doorway to the web by most people because they want things served up to them. Why would you censor them? They have nothing to say.

So censorship may be a ruse ... Think about it... Censorship in the internet age? In all this lunacy?

Maybe the enthusiasm for the web has levelled out. And we are up to speed in a wider sense the internet open up. And now, the drama is contrived to keep us engrossed in our relatively new but waning tech - in terms of novelty.
 
Metrist said:
So censorship may be a ruse ... Think about it... Censorship in the internet age? In all this lunacy?
Click to expand...

I think it's not so much that censorship as a whole is a problem, but rather that censorship on the popular platforms is an issue.

If YT and Twitter and Google ban or "demote" me, who cares? I can start my own web site. The trouble is, no one will ever find it because the only way people find stuff is via those services - as you said.

So then, why don't people just stop using those services? Because they can't. Google literally has its mitts in EVERYTHING. Google Maps goes down, and people freak out! It's like: Well, use a printed map? 😱

Or take YouTube: sure, there are alternatives, but in order for any of them to matter, people would have to start using them and leave YT en masse.

Unless there's some obvious benefit other than being fed up with all the current nonsense, that'll never happen since most people simply can't be bothered. Saying, "Let's all use this other service!" is a bit like 12 ducks madly paddling in the ocean to change the current while a huge tidal wave is rolling in. The ducks can't change the flow of water because that's a linear approach. Their actions may have nonlinear effects, but those are totally unpredictable.

A large part of this whole problem is the fact that literally every huge internet company today was funded and pushed in a certain direction by venture capital companies (aka the CIA, etc) for the express purpose of doing the kinds of things they do today.

But not enough people know and understand that because they still think it's all about "American ingenuity" or whatever.

IOW, there are just so many lies, and structures built upon lies, and then even more lies built on top of that... Kind of like (especially) Western governments.

Things are so messed up that even those who make a valiant effort to fix it simply have no chance of actually succeeding in the way they think.

When it all becomes so hysterical, about the only thing that will change things for the better is a "hard reset" of some description. Hopefully that doesn't mean "KABOOM. SPLAT!"
 
I think we can do what they can do, and do it better. But they have ability to do it for us - seemingly benign and helpful - creating a dependency, and they can do it fast, because it is their expertise. And so any initiative is thwarted, because they can provide solutions, but at the same time steer us always back to their solutions - we are being technologically trolled. Everything is ad based. We are interfaced with advertising the way we would interface with the web.

And it is due to regular people not having a long term plan, or mistaking babelization for innovation. They steer the ship, always to make us follow, since we are beholden to their sophistication. But the web began as a simple, easily understood and accessible medium, that anyone can set up a interface on... What happened?

Well, I think people began to find success and popularity, and it was like a gold rush. And who better to help people in their dreams than experts. And so things got all technical, with stats, tracking, ect. And it got all convoluted, and in the gold rush, people realized it was nothing more than dreams, and sold dreams. But dreams aren't packaged as dreams.... They are tied to products and services. Anyway the internet won't help employ the people it has displaced, except that we advertise. And this is what the web has become - an advertisement for itself; comprised of people that want to earn a living, but if everyone is selling and no one is buying, then it will go POOF!

So what is special about the web was quickly commercialized, but what is special about it is it is free and open, but people are not as venturesome as business organizations, and all businesses can do is set up shop.... It's a fundemental problem.

So after all the dreams crash, we realize it to be a medium - no more, no less. And though we are good at selling ourselves - no one is buying... So the problem is not the medium of the web, but us.

We crossed a threshold where we replaced ourselves, and though we try to remain viable, it is in contradiction to our goals - to let machines and automation do it for us. And for a innovative few, get rich.

So, no one is addressing how we replace ourselves. Everyone is trying to get on the side where we are needed, not concerned about the larger picture. And in this atmosphere, advertising is a last refuge.

It's like a Tower of Babel, and though it started with dreams, people come around to their senses and become practical.
 
Okay, another one taken down. Now Soutfront's Facebook page and YouTube channel have been deleted and banned without any warning, according to Southfront:

southfront.org

Appeal Of SouthFront Steering Committee Regarding Censorship On YouTube And Facebook

Dear friends, you can find all SouthFront videos on our website in the section “SouthFront TV“. SouthFront’s YouTube Channel Is...
southfront.org southfront.org

That's a real shame. I liked Southfront, and their Syria reporting.

I know this has been said a million times before, but why can't we all migrate to another video sharing platform that isn't owned by 'them'? Is there such a thing?
 
aragorn said:
I know this has been said a million times before, but why can't we all migrate to another video sharing platform that isn't owned by 'them'? Is there such a thing?
Click to expand...

That's pretty bad, I like SouthFront too. The push for Orwellian-style control has been really insane these days and covid has been a really useful smoke screen to roll it out overtly.

I guess if there is a platform not owned by 'them' we could move. But we'd be mostly preaching to the choir there as most people who want to avoid YouTube, Facebook or Twitter do it for similar reasons as us. It's the ones still 'on the fence' we want to reach out to, not the ones who have already made their choice between the blue and red pill. And that requires presence in the mainstream sphere - the worst part of which is exposure to nutcases and arrogant twats. But oh well, they're good for character building I guess ;-)
 
aragorn said:
Now Soutfront's Facebook page and YouTube channel have been deleted and banned without any warning, according to Southfront:
Click to expand...

The same thing has happened to David Icke

www.sott.net

Why you should oppose the censorship of David Icke (hint: It's got nothing to do with Icke)

Within 48 hours both Facebook and then Youtube have deleted the accounts of David Icke for posting "content that disputes the existence and transmission of Covid-19 as described by the WHO and the NHS." Other platforms may soon fall in suit, as...
www.sott.net www.sott.net
 
aragorn said:
I know this has been said a million times before, but why can't we all migrate to another video sharing platform that isn't owned by 'them'? Is there such a thing?
Click to expand...

I believe there are alternative platforms, but it's not the address of the tech that matters so much as it how many ears and eyes it commands.

Why post where you know your video will go unseen, simply because of a lack of users?

I also speculate that running a YouTube type platform must be insanely expensive. Think of the endless warehouses of servers and the electricity bills... TBH, I've never been entirely able to convince myself that Google and Alphabet or whatever they call their collective isn't running at a perpetual dead loss, propped up by shadow money simply because it's useful to keep them operating -in terms of granular social engineering.
 
About YouTube alternatives...
I have this app on my phone called LBRY. It is like a video platform, but it is kind of sparse right now. It seems to be growing and improving. It is a large download: about 90mb.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom