Marcinkowski
Member
did the search test, only videos of 1 year old i find in the search menu
Love how instantly everyone freaks out. Probably a glitch of some sort.
You have no fucking idea what's this about.Cry me a river.
> Muh millionaire virtual friendo whom i used to loath pre 2016 but now he based he a gud boy who didn't do nothin'.
This "culture war" and the heroes both sides choose is so funny!
Imagine cheering for pewds of all people! What a time to be alive!
Justin Timberlake b-side with alternative lyrics?You have no fucking idea what's this about.
Did search ..came up with video...?
As long as they dont ban Alanah Pearce
Didn't he just sign some kinda streaming deal with them?
Also fuck Youtube.
I hope its sarcastic, cus we need every sjw to be banned.
But i do? He's been branded an alt right-er because he said the n word once during a stream and he supported Trump in 2016 so they've been out to get him since.You have no fucking idea what's this about.
It's a privately owned site. They don't even have to be subtle about it. They could announce tomorrow that anyone who has red hair will be banned and it would be perfectly legal. Even worse is there is no real alternative to youtube so if you or me or anyone else doesn't like it...well... nothing...Re: his videos still appearing in search. Correct, however search typically brings up a person's channel and their latest videos whereas PewDiePie's channel is absent from search, the videos that do show up are older or from other channels, and subscribers did not receive a notification when he posted his video today.
Here are my thoughts, and I'll add them to the OP.
The entertainment value of his content, his net worth, and his personality are irrelevant. The point here is that someone's voice was censored. Every day people get shadow banned and outright deplatformed. In this case it happened to the biggest YouTube creator, how many people with smaller audiences have also been shadow banned without explanation? A good example of how easily someone's voice can be silenced or their podium removed.
Correlation does not equal causation.But i do? He's been branded an alt right-er because he said the n word once during a stream and he supported Trump in 2016 so they've been out to get him since.
But i do? He's been branded an alt right-er because he said the n word once during a stream and he supported Trump in 2016 so they've been out to get him since.
Point is he's an insufferable twat whom this very forum used to shit on until he became an "asset" in the war against the SJWs and their censorship.
But i do? He's been branded an alt right-er because he said the n word once during a stream and he supported Trump in 2016 so they've been out to get him since.
Point is he's an insufferable twat whom this very forum used to shit on until he became an "asset" in the war against the SJWs and their censorship.
It is an unexplored frontier. On one hand a company has the right to refuse to allow users to participate on their platform, on the other hand social media has become the modern town square.It's a privately owned site. They don't even have to be subtle about it. They could announce tomorrow that anyone who has red hair will be banned and it would be perfectly legal. Even worse is there is no real alternative to youtube so if you or me or anyone else doesn't like it...well... nothing...
If the government annexed social meida then it really would be freedom of speech. But seeing how the government runs everything else wouldn't that be a shit show to see?It is an unexplored frontier. On one hand a company has the right to refuse to allow users to participate on their platform, on the other hand social media has become the modern town square.
At what point do Facebook/Twitter/YouTube move from being communities to becoming a public space? Frankly there are a lot of questions about the internet and it is something I am not completely sure how to judge myself. I am not in favor regulation in general but I do have concerns about these social media giants.
There have been a lot of SCOTUS cases regarding the first amendment. Some of the most commonly cited one for these sorts of incidents are Marsh V. Alabama and Manhattan Community Access Corp. V. Halleck. I think it is an issue worth reading about and debating.
No, you definitely don't.But i do?
I certainly hope that we are never in a position such that social media is run by the government. I think this is something that would ideally be brought to SCOTUS. Are social media posts protected under the first amendment or should someone be banned for their political views, religious views, or other philosophy? What separates NeoGAF from Facebook? Perhaps the size of the website and/or it's mission/intent matter. Twitter and Facebook aim to be the new public square but they also want the immunity of being a closed community. It's a nuanced issue.If the government annexed social meida then it really would be freedom of speech. But seeing how the government runs everything else wouldn't that be a shit show to see?
If the government annexed social meida then it really would be freedom of speech. But seeing how the government runs everything else wouldn't that be a shit show to see?