Cool story but not really sure where this is coming from:
>Youtube caved to corrupt government censorship
Youtube, the private company, is doing what it thinks is best for the business. They are not the government, free speech does not apply, there is no censorship against any right.
"Independent", Satire right?!
Haven't you heard of PRISM? or 'patriot act'?
The biggest concerned, i believe, most people have with censorship is that "they censor and at the same time claim to be a 'platform' not 'publishers'".
It would be 'ok', if they say who they 'are', not pretend to be open and at the same time silence voices who they disagree with by pretending to 'fact check'. 'Fact check' what? Peoples conversations? For what reason? Then it should, at least, be voluntary. You see the concern people have, right?!
It is voluntary, you agreed to the EULA when you signed up for Youtube.
"If we reasonably believe that any Content is in breach of this Agreement or may cause harm to YouTube, our users, or third parties, we may remove or take down that Content in our discretion."
>Youtube caved to corrupt government censorship
Youtube, the private company, is doing what it thinks is best for the business. They are not the government, free speech does not apply, there is no censorship against any right.