YouTube refuses Lieberman request

Trouble in Paradise?

youtube

 

 

The chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee today asked Google, the parent company of the popular online video-sharing site, YouTube, to immediately remove content produced by Islamist terrorist organizations from YouTube and prevent similar
content from reappearing. However, the company immediately refused to comply with his request.

Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) made the request in a letter to Eric Schmidt, the chairman of the board and chief executive officer at Google, in which he said that YouTube unwittingly, permits Islamist
terrorist groups to maintain an active, pervasive and amplified voice despite military setbacks or successful operations by the law enforcement and intelligence communities.

Lieberman asked the company not only to remove existing content but also identify changes that Google plans to make to YouTube’s community guidelines and explain how it plans to enforce the
guidelines. Lieberman said removing such content should be a straightforward task since so many of the Islamist terrorist organizations brand their material with logos or icons identifying their provenance.

However, YouTube in a response this afternoon, said taking those actions was not so simple and refused to remove all videos mentioning or featuring these groups without consideration of whether the videos were legal, nonviolent or non-hate speech videos.

While we respect and understand his views, YouTube encourages free speech and defends everyone’s right to express unpopular points of view, the company said. We believe that YouTube is a richer and more relevant platform for users precisely because it hosts a diverse range of views, and rather than stifle debate, we allow our users to view all acceptable content and make up their own minds.

The statement thanked Lieberman for alerting the company last week of several videos which violated the company’s community guidelines and that have subsequently been removed. However, the statement said that most of the videos, which did not contain violent or hate speech content, were not removed because they do not violate our Community Guidelines.

YouTube’s community guidelines prohibit hate speech and ask users not to post videos that show someone getting hurt, attacked or humiliated. According to the YouTube Community Guidelines, users can flag videos they feel are inappropriate, which may then be removed from the site
by the company after review.

Lieberman’s letter comes after his committee released a report, Violent Islamist Extremism, the Internet and the Homegrown Terrorist Threat, May 8 that said chatrooms, message boards and Web sites can play critical roles in recruitment, indoctrination into violent Islamist theology, linking radicalized individuals and providing information to independent terrorists unaffiliated with organizations. The report also said the government needs to develop a plan to counter terrorist groups’ increasing reliance on the Internet.

However, whatever federal strategy is developed may face scrutiny from critics who say the committee’s May 8 report unfairly singled out Muslims as possible extremists, in addition to civil libertarians and privacy advocates concerned with protecting free speech and Internet freedom.

John Morris, senior counsel at the Center for Democracy and Technology, said Lieberman’s letter was a practical impossibility and having sites such as YouTube pre-screen content would radically
change how the Internet is used.

YouTube noted in its statement that hundreds of thousands of videos are uploaded to the site daily.

The government can’t get involved in suppressing videos if the content is not illegal, Morris said, explaining that such a policy would likely face stiff opposition from advocates of First Amendment
rights.

Source

Advertisement

The loathsome smearing of Israel’s critics

And they say that free speech exists in the West! That is a crock. The only thing that one is free to say are opinions in line with the government – anything else will be punishable. Here is an article showing how people who criticize the Israeli regime are smeared.

 

johann hari

In the US and Britain, there is a campaign to smear anybody who tries to describe the plight of the Palestinian people. It is an attempt to intimidate and silence – and to a large degree, it works. There is
nobody these self-appointed spokesmen for Israel will not attack as anti-Jewish: liberal Jews, rabbis, even Holocaust survivors.

My own case isn’t especially important, but it illustrates how the wider process of intimidation works. I have worked undercover at both the Finsbury Park mosque and among neo-Nazi Holocaust deniers to expose the Jew-hatred there; when I went on the Islam Channel to challenge the anti-Semitism of Islamists, I received a rash of death threats calling me “a Jew-lover”, “a Zionist-homo pig” and more.

Ah, but wait. I have also reported from Gaza and the West Bank. Last week, I wrote an article that described how untreated sewage was being pumped from illegal Israeli settlements on to Palestinian land, contaminating their reservoirs. This isn’t controversial. It has been documented by Friends of the Earth, and I have seen it with my own eyes.

The response? There was little attempt to dispute the facts I offered. Instead, some of the most high profile “pro-Israel” writers and media monitoring groups – including Honest Reporting and Camera – said I an anti-Jewish bigot akin to Joseph Goebbels and Mahmoud Ahmadinejadh, while Melanie Phillips even linked the stabbing of two Jewish people in North London to articles like mine. Vast numbers of e-mails came flooding in calling for me to be sacked.

Any attempt to describe accurately the situation for Palestinians is met like this. If you recount the pumping of sewage onto Palestinian land, “Honest Reporting” claims you are reviving the anti-Semitic myth of Jews “poisoning the wells.” If you interview a woman whose baby died in 2002 because she was detained – in labour – by Israeli soldiers at a checkpoint within the West Bank, “Honest Reporting” will say you didn’t explain “the real cause”: the election of Hamas in, um, 2006. And on, and on.

Click to see full article here