PragerU is also fighting censorship (YouTube in this case)

submitted by neovulcan from (youtube.com)

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Tortoise 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Mind giving a TLDW?

[–]neovulcan[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Basically, they outline that you can't be both a public forum and an independent platform, but YouTube is managing both. If PragerU's case prevails, YouTube should be forced to choose between censorship and their enhanced status as a public forum. Currently they're having their cake and eating it too.

[–]Tortoise 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

What a shitty case then, they want to take away their section 203 immunity right?

This is terrible. First its youtube, then its fringe sites like raddle that get canceled by the law just because they don't allow all viewpoints.

[–]neovulcan[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Well, that's the worst case scenario. I'm sure they'd settle for their conservative videos getting unblocked. Most of their videos are reasonable from what I can tell, but they put them out so much faster than I can watch them.

[–]Tortoise 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That is literally what they are sueing for though. So thats a pretty fucking big worse case scenario.