Thursday, June 20, 2019
Hawley's bill on Section 230 provokes alarming podcasts and blog posts, including mine and Tim Pool's
A lot of talk in the past 24 hours.
First in the video above, Section 230 relates to the CDA, not DMCA.
OK, I gave a 100-minute billcast on “Stephen Ignoramus” yesterday, link.
A little comment about my work on the EMP and electric grid problem was accidentally lost in editing. I would also add that I “announced” Hawley’s bill at the start of the video, but forgot to really explain the “moderator paradox” in that Section 230 does allow reasonable moderation and axiomatic manipulation of content. The problem is that the major social media platforms do so much of it that many view them as publishers.
I discussed a couple of predictions of mine: that we will see YouTube selecting whom it wants not only to monetize but even publish at all on its platform, partly because of the EU Copyright Directive issues but also now because “hate speech” (especially its stochastic nature on the right) is impossible to define in a way it can be moderated objectively. I also explained that I need to keep my own speech; I can’t be forced into a situation where I have to work for somebody else first (and serve their ends).
Well, all of this follows one of my own more controversial posts Tuesday, about my plans after 2021. as well as an earlier one there (May 30) proposing bundled paywalls as part of a solution (Stephen was already familiar with that).
This morning, Tim Pool made a particularly alarming post predicting that his channel will be banned from YouTube (although he could continue on Minds, Bitchute, etc). He discussed the ban of Black Pigeon Speaks, which was reversed by pressure. The channel had no strikes, but was suddenly accused of hate speech by YouTube’s new standards. Pool reinforces the idea that YouTube wants to be more like Netflix, with content from already professional sources, and fewer “amateurs” competing with people who have jobs in media. Pool introduced an article by David Auerbach, “The Coming Gentrification of YouTube”.
Generally Google companies give plenty of notice when they plan major changes in policy which can affect creators. But YouTube seems to be moving erratically and suddenly.
YouTube has also made statements about “keeping people safe”. Some minority groups are able to claim that their members are personally more vulnerable to attacks from radicalized persons (and need much more of a zero-tolerance approach) than most other users, who will not see anything terribly wrong with the speech that is being taken down.