• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Pewdiepie Shadow Banned on YouTube

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!
 

BadBurger

Is 'That Pure Potato'
qN7VkB4.png


He's already rich and can go someplace else if he wants anyways.
 
Has he been talking about any political things that would make Google want him silenced? Something about Hunter Biden's emails and the clear corruption of the entire Biden family?
 

Lupin3

Targeting terrorists with a D-Pad
Did search ..came up with video...?

"Searching for "Pewdiepie" will bring up a few older videos and a bunch of compilation/reaction videos but not his channel and latest video."

Got the same results myself and wondered what was wrong before I read the above line. At least I don't see his channel.
 

Evangelion Unit-01

Master Chief
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.
 

Evangelion Unit-01

Master Chief
Update: Looks like his channel is now back at the top of search. Interesting. I'm sure this will inevitably be attributed to an error but part of me has trouble believing those excuses.
 

Azurro

Banned
Assuming he's being shadow banned for something he said, I think this is a bit scary, the amount of power that a bunch of blue haired overweight progressives in Silicon Valley have to punish "wrong think".

Whether you like his channel or not is irrelevant. It's probably the election that is exacerbating this, they are terrified of the orange guy winning again.
 
Last edited:
You have no fucking idea what's this about.
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.
 

MetalAlien

Banned
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.
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...
 

u4ea

Member
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.

He's just a dude that looks at memes, plays video games and has humor a lot of people like.
That's it.

There is no alt-rights connections, SJW stuff or political agendas.
People just need to stop with this sh*t.
 

teezzy

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.

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.

This very forum was Era before Era though. Thank God things have changed.

We still shit on him.

What are you talking about?
 

Evangelion Unit-01

Master Chief
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...
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.
 
Last edited:
The truth is big tech enjoys certain protections because places like Twitter and Youtube claim to be platforms and not publishers, the more they curate and delete content the more they become publishers, they're certainly not meant to be allowed to do this shit if they want the protections they receive, but it's a fool's game waiting for the government to enforce their own laws if the people breaking them are rich enough
 

MetalAlien

Banned
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.
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?
 

Evangelion Unit-01

Master Chief
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?
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?

There's more accountability if government messes up like this. And to be fair the government is already involved, they have special protections for these companies, they subsidize them... pretending this is just the free market is silly, no anti-trust laws are being enacted and the rules are different for them even if they don't obey the rules.
 
Top Bottom