YouTube bans knife and gun videos (Retry #1)


PDA






I'm Thinking...
September 18, 2008, 02:30 PM
(hopefully this is the correct forum)

There goes the neighborhood (http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?YouTube_bans_knife_and_gun_videos&in_article_id=314919&in_page_id=34) :mad: :cuss:


YouTube has moved to stem growing concern that its website glamourises violence by banning videos featuring weapons.

The Google-owned video-sharing site has decided to introduce the ban for the UK only amid widespread unease about the increase in knife crime in the country.

It says that any video which is clearly "showing weapons with the aim of intimidation" will be taken down from the site.

Not all such videos will be removed immediately, however, as the ban will not be retrospective and any offending footage already on the site will need to be reported again.

"We recognise that there has been particular concern over videos in the UK that involve showing weapons with the aim of intimidation, and this is one of the areas we are addressing," a YouTube spokesperson said.

The move has been welcomed by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith as a "real step forward" and she encouraged other sites to take similar action.

"I would like to see other internet service providers follow suit to reinforce our message that violence will not be tolerated either on the internet or in the real world," she said.

Today's announcement follows a cross-party report by MPs this summer which warned that the internet had a "dark side" from which users need to be protected against.


(re-posting this due to loss of msg-body the first time)

If you enjoyed reading about "YouTube bans knife and gun videos (Retry #1)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
MJRW
September 18, 2008, 02:34 PM
Doesn't seem like a very big deal to me. If they just do what they said, "ban any video which is clearly 'showing weapons with the aim of intimidation,'" it seems reasonable. I think it largely depends on how they apply that.

Heartless_Conservative
September 18, 2008, 02:38 PM
It also looks like its only for the UK domain, honestly I've pretty much given up on Formerly Great Britain.

csmkersh
September 18, 2008, 02:40 PM
Who defines "weapons with the aim of intimidation?'" the anti-self defense left? YES!

Guns and more
September 18, 2008, 02:43 PM
Meanwhile videos of backyard fighting where people beat the crap out of each other for money are okay.

RP88
September 18, 2008, 02:55 PM
when I saw "UK", I sighed in relief. At least the american/international site still has some sort of idea of what freedom is.

MJRW
September 18, 2008, 02:58 PM
when I saw "UK", I sighed in relief. At least the american/international site still has some sort of idea of what freedom is.

How does a company deciding to include a set of content losing the idea of freedom? Is youtube run by the government and I'm just not aware of it? It seems to me that a company making a decision and executing that decision is exactly in line with "some sort of idea of what freedome is."

GEM
September 18, 2008, 03:01 PM
An editor of a US gun magazine told me that they had to censor cover art for the UK edition a few years ago. I don't know if they still sell US gun mags over there.

The UK gun magazines used to run editorials denouncing our use of humanoid targets in IPSC or IDPA as barbaric and detrimental to 'sport'. Then all that was wiped out there.

NavajoNPaleFace
September 18, 2008, 03:07 PM
It's their house we rent.

If they insist we have to play by the landlord's wishes....so be it or we don't use or frequent the site.

RP88
September 18, 2008, 03:09 PM
How does a company deciding to include a set of content losing the idea of freedom? Is youtube run by the government and I'm just not aware of it? It seems to me that a company making a decision and executing that decision is exactly in line with "some sort of idea of what freedome is."

the freedom to not give a **** about other people's freedoms. Ah yes, what a great freedom to have. That's the problem nowadays, though. Sounds alot like the general anti-gun crowd:

"hey! I hate guns! I have the freedom to protest about them. So, let's see if we can use our freedoms and take away other people's freedoms because we happen to not like them having those freedoms!"

sound familiar?

kingjoey
September 18, 2008, 03:12 PM
We're going to be switching all of our videos over to Rifletube.com just to avoid such headaches and whining MMM-types.

MJRW
September 18, 2008, 03:13 PM
No, in fact, I find your analogy to be completely irrelevant. They aren't taking any freedoms from anyone at all. I mean, it might actually be the worst analogy ever. They aren't protesting anything. They aren't asking that anyone give up anything. They aren't stopping the videos from being made. The rights of the private property owner to run his property as he sees fit is valid. So, no, it doesn't sound at all familiar.

HGUNHNTR
September 18, 2008, 03:15 PM
Those videos are usually people acting stupid anyway, good riddance.

cambeul41
September 18, 2008, 03:48 PM
I have seen funny, stupid, educational, and boring gun and knife videos -- but intimidating ones? Nope, haven't seen one of those.

romma
September 18, 2008, 03:54 PM
la la la la laaa laa... If I don't see any guns, they will cease to exist!

Excuse me while I close my eyes and put my fingers in my ears...

RP88
September 18, 2008, 03:57 PM
I have seen funny, stupid, educational, and boring gun and knife videos -- but intimidating ones? Nope, haven't seen one of those.

thats the point apparently. They arent cracking down particularly on violence or anything; they're 'banning' something that they politically/personally do not like by saying that a mere video about them is intimidating in nature.

damien
September 18, 2008, 04:06 PM
Wasn't it the brits who were complaining about the Shoot Em Up poster because a gun was featured prominently on it? Seems like par for the course with those people.

FourNineFoxtrot
September 18, 2008, 06:49 PM
Don't like it much, but it's their site.


Maybe there's an upside; it'll be good for YouTube's less squeamish competition. That's what free market means; they don't have to sell it, I don't have to buy it from them.

PTK
September 18, 2008, 06:59 PM
My pile o' videos seems intact, and it's well known that I have nothing BUT firearms videos on there.

As I read it, the video style I have (no violence, not intimidating, etc.) is perfectly allowed. I'll continue sharing with folks. :)

Bitmap
September 18, 2008, 07:03 PM
This is the same kind of nonsense at my job. They recently started blocking access to all the gun related sights they can find. I can spend all day on youtube, ebay, DU, the peta forums, payless shoes, autozone, etc., but I can't go to THR, gunbroker, auctionarms, gunsamerica, or midwayusa.

They try to make it sound like an information security issue. If I try to go to one of these urls I get a message that the site is not secure.

Sure, it's their network, but to claim THR is not appropriate for work but DU is? Give me a break.

Hk91-762mm
September 18, 2008, 08:07 PM
all mine work just fine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yryV-5TfwvE&feature=related

jakemccoy
September 18, 2008, 09:30 PM
I vote for even more Youtube censorship. Heavy censorship would open up an opportunity for me and other investors to start a video site with less restrictions.

Blackbeard
September 18, 2008, 09:34 PM
Yes, because banning things certainly doesn't make them attractive or glamorous.......NOT!

jakemccoy
September 18, 2008, 09:37 PM
How about www. BannedFromYoutube.com?

That would seem like a good idea for a website if Youtube starts acting up, but currently that particular domain has a squatter.

DaleA
September 18, 2008, 09:38 PM
"-to reinforce our message that violence will not be tolerated either on the internet or in the real world."

Well, good luck with THAT.

Zach S
September 18, 2008, 09:42 PM
introduce the ban for the UK only
Oddly enough, I'm not surprised. Didnt they detain a guy at an airport for wearing a transformers t shirt?

"Cool, that's Optimus - OMG HE'S GOT A SWORD!!!"

Kind of Blued
September 19, 2008, 12:49 AM
I thought they were done? Apparently, they're still circling the toilet bowl on their way down.

Gunnerpalace
September 19, 2008, 01:01 AM
We're going to be switching all of our videos over to Rifletube.com just to avoid such headaches and whining MMM-types.

There wont be a mass exodus, I'll explain tomorrow somebody remind me.

Ben86
September 19, 2008, 01:09 AM
What this ban is really aimed at is islamo-terrorist propoganda movies. If this ban does not trickle over to weapon demonstration then I am not worried. I doubt it will get out of hand because YouTube wants people to use it to the max, that way they make more money. The less people that use it the less money they make.

Superlite27
September 19, 2008, 08:51 AM
The logical conclusion to this is that: since the depiction of weapons in YouTube videos is now verboten, won't they have to ban actual theater movies since they display intimidating use of weapons?

Or are violent Hollywood films O.K.? If you censor violent videos, aren't movies included in the "video" format?

Calibre44
September 19, 2008, 09:02 AM
Gem wrote: An editor of a US gun magazine told me that they had to censor cover art for the UK edition a few years ago. I don't know if they still sell US gun mags over there.

Gun mags are freely available in the UK including ‘Guns and Ammo’

Damien wrote: Wasn't it the brits who were complaining about the Shoot Em Up poster because a gun was featured prominently on it? Seems like par for the course with those people.

No it wasn’t ‘the brits’, it was probably some leftly tree hugging pussy who complained (you’ve got them in the US too). The poster was not taken down. Film posters involving guns are all over the place over here including on buses

Chisel Head
September 19, 2008, 09:09 AM
...What this ban is really aimed at is islamo-terrorist propoganda movies...In that case, wouldn't it be better to cure the disease, instead of the symptom?... since the depiction of weapons in YouTube videos is now verboten, won't they have to ban actual theater movies since they display intimidating use of weapons?If they did that, I don't think Dity Harry's day will be made...Wasn't it the brits who were complaining about the Shoot Em Up poster because a gun was featured prominently on it?...If it wasn't, would Youtube go out of their way to voluntarily censor their videos for the British market only?
The British government is taking a hypocritical stand, when they turn a blind eye to British- mercenaries and mercenary contracting companies interfering with the affairs of "developing countries". Thus, forcing refugees to flee those countries and to enter ours. Whereas, France has taken the step to outlaw mercenary activity.
So, any kind of terrorism to happen in Britain ends up being poetic justice

wulfbyte
September 19, 2008, 09:47 AM
Banning of certain types of videos on Youtube.com. Why is this troubling? From my perspective it is not about what youtube.com chooses to do or not do, but rather that a particular government has placed restrictions on what may or may not be published. Was there a law passed which outlaws this type of information? Or was sufficient pressure placed to ensure compliance? Will this ban extend to other publishers (web sites and or ISP's)? If I publish materials of this type on the internet, with the UK government go after me next?

Anytime freedoms are suppressed anywhere, it is cause for concern. In an age when I may publish information from my home to the entire world at the push of a button, should I ignore what is clearly an attack on a fellow publisher? Will I allow freedoms to be eroded away in the name of propriety and so called "political correctness"? Today is the removal of the mere depiction of weapons; tomorrow?

Calibre44
September 19, 2008, 10:11 AM
Chisel Head wrote: So, any kind of terrorism to happen in Britain ends up being poetic justice


That type of comment is exceptionally low round, extremely offensive and not welcome on this forum.

Read the rules for posting!

eflatminor
September 19, 2008, 10:23 AM
You know who else felt strongly that citizens needed protection "for their own good'? Mussolini is a good example, so was Hilter. Stalin was also big on doing what was best for his people, even if that meant getting rid of those that didn't "get it". Those Brits are so lucky to have such big hearted MPs to look after them.

Blofeld
September 19, 2008, 10:34 AM
Perhaps the words "gun" and "knife" should be stricken from the language altogether? Maybe they will cease to exist if we don't mention them.

GrizzlyGraves
September 19, 2008, 12:56 PM
All this proves is that my countrymen have proven time and time again that the government knows whats best for them.

If something goes wrong, if somebody is scared by a video on the internet then have no fear, the Home Office is here!

They are truly the nation formally known as Great Britain.

drgrenthum
September 19, 2008, 01:11 PM
i dont know if anyone elsse has pointed this out, but its the internet. If they cant post on UK youtube what is to stop them going to regular youtube or looking up any other type of violence one would wish to see on the internet.

I fail to see how limiting the content of UK youtube will decrease any crime.

arthurcw
September 19, 2008, 01:37 PM
I fail to see how limiting the content of UK youtube will decrease any crime.

It’s not about limiting crime, it's about limiting exposure. You let people see ANY gun images, positive or negative, that you didn’t pre package form mass consumptions, you run the risk of people accepting guns as common place.

If, however, you control ALL exposure to guns and make sure that the exposure that your subjects get is all negative and planned for maximum affect, then you can keep them scared of all weapons and make them have weak bladders at the sight of an empty .22lr casing.

If they cant post on UK youtube what is to stop them going to regular youtube or looking up any other type of violence one would wish to see on the internet.

Easy. A country, especially one that doesn't have free speech laws, can go to its Internet providers and say, "You will block these IP addresses." The companies that don't want to end up at the pointy end of Her Majesties Government will comply. Down stream companies being blocked will say, "Hang on, don't block us. We will regulate ourselves." So YouTube will probably deny any UK IPs from getting "Certain Content" on the regular YouTube. Simple.

ETA: Not being a holier than thou American. It's wouldn't be so hard for .gov here to block sites based on Homeland Security Issues. It just may not stick if the courts get involved. But then again... Do you really trust any branch of .gov to do the right thing?

Gunnerpalace
September 19, 2008, 03:21 PM
I'm Back Ok

For the Youtube inclined you may remember when the MPAA went postal and youtube agreed that the would pull movies even if the movie was playing tin the other room of a video blog,

Well people got bent and for a while everyone was on the bandwagon of lets go to Live-Leak or some others site few went the rest stayed,

The best you can do is complain to Youtube, but then again England is a lost cause.

Chisel Head
September 19, 2008, 04:04 PM
...That type of comment is exceptionally low round, extremely offensive and not welcome on this forum.

Read the rules for posting!...You're right. I should have worded the comment carefully. I should have added that poetic justice is justified, as long as it affects only those guilty and not innocent people. In which case, I referred to condoning politicians and the businessmen conducting this dirty business. Since your form of government isn't democratic, I couldn't honestly imply that the constituents who vote those politicians into office could be held directly responsible...i dont know if anyone elsse has pointed this out, but its the internet. If they cant post on UK youtube what is to stop them going to regular youtube or looking up any other type of violence one would wish to see on the internet...Fine. We can always find ways to outsmart those who wish to treat us like small children. We could always view what we want, through a proxy server. But, nevertheless, it's somehow insulting to us

makarovnik
September 19, 2008, 04:49 PM
Pooh!

PILMAN
September 19, 2008, 04:56 PM
Youtube already has censorship by country options, for example, I had a German friend trying to view a video about Neo Nazi gangs, and it said he wasn't allowed to view that video from his country. Youtube can block by IP with any gun related videos.

Beatnik
September 19, 2008, 05:01 PM
Thanks for pointing that out Gunnerpalace....
Youtube already has several restrictions in place, besides the copyright violations restrictions.
Anyone ever watched porn on youtube, ever?
No.
That must mean that there isn't any more porn on the internet now, right?

If Youtube/Google were truly anti, we'd be a lot more aware of it, and they wouldn't rule the world right now.
All they're doing is bowing to market forces in the UK. This a good thing, even despite the fact that the UK doesn't want what's right for them.

Blofeld
September 19, 2008, 05:28 PM
Quantum of Solace, the new James Bond film, opens Nov.14. From what I've seen of the trailers and sneak peeks, firearms are prominently featured in this film, a film about a British guy.

How far a step is it for a country that used to put X ratings on films that we would watch on T.V. here to ban depictions of all weapons from all media?

Chisel Head
September 19, 2008, 06:21 PM
...I had a German friend trying to view a video about Neo Nazi gangs, and it said he wasn't allowed to view that video from his country...On some sites, I get the old 404. I used to think that was I.P. related. But, like your friend, maybe it was somehow segregated by country.
As far as videos are concerned, I have't yet had any problems viewing, in that respect. Maybe, the Verfaßungsschutz is keeping an eye on him

SaMx
September 19, 2008, 07:09 PM
No it wasn’t ‘the brits’, it was probably some leftly tree hugging pussy who complained (you’ve got them in the US too). The poster was not taken down. Film posters involving guns are all over the place over here including on buses
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/nov/21/asa.advertising?gusrc=rss&feed=media

KP89
September 19, 2008, 07:43 PM
YouTube can do what ever it wants, I don't personally agree with it but that is certainly their choice - it does go against their founding principles.

YouTube also will also have some of those laws apply in the US due to Liberman(or so he says at least).

To be honest everything is on the internet and stopping certain things on youtube certainly won't prevent it from ending up on another website.

myrockfight
September 19, 2008, 08:20 PM
Whatever. Quite frankly. I wouldn't mind. It would just give someone, or a company, who is pro-gun, an opportunity to sieze that part of the market. I can't say whether it is an overall bad move for the RKBA though.

Chisel Head
September 20, 2008, 02:59 AM
What are you going to do with an alternative video site which is unknown? Aside from search engine linking, I doubt that Youtube, itself, is going to provide a link to the alternative site

Cosmoline
September 20, 2008, 03:35 AM
The specific policy is minor, but could be interpreted broadly. What bothers me is that as the internet gets more and more centralized with power in the hands of a few mega-companies, it will become much easier to institute social controls. Look at how China has been able to limit its citizens access. I think that's the pattern a lot of countries would like to follow. Some in our own government would like to ban wrongspeaking, whether it's someone being stupid with a firearm or someone calling for death to Americans. I find that a very dangerous road to go down. The great thing about this massive, sordid world of the internet is its freedom. Take that away and you have yet another a conduit to shove commercial products down the gullet of the masses. Just like FM radio and TV.

If you enjoyed reading about "YouTube bans knife and gun videos (Retry #1)" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!