this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
385 points (95.1% liked)

Technology

59346 readers
7014 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

YouTube suspends Russell Brand from making money off his channel — The suspension comes following the publication of rape and sexual assault allegations against the British star::YouTube has blocked Russell Brand from making money off its platform and the BBC pulled some of his shows from its online streaming service in the wake of rape and sexual assault allegations against the comedian-turned-influencer.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] erranto@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Is it against YT TOS or did they take the liberty with this decision

Second, as much as I have always found him sketchy and a very irritating person, I am very alarmed by the erosion of people's right to be presumed innocent until found guilty. even when I know that he is quite capable of the committing those allegation

[–] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A platform can choose themselves who they extend the platform to.

It may not be justice, but if Youtube decides to demonetise every video featuring red sweaters, then they have the liberty to do so.

[–] sugartits@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (5 children)

That's too much power for a monopoly to have. And YouTube is quite close to a monopoly.

Maybe "more fool you" but entire livelihoods and businesses rely on YouTube not cutting them off at any random moment with no notice or warning.

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That's why it's so important to just build your own website and to stop being dependent on other people for anything you have.

[–] SoBoredAtWork@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Right. "just build your own YouTube" is the solution. 👍

PeerTube exists yet you still whine.

[–] That_One_Demon@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

YouTube sucks, but it's not a monopoly. It's nowhere close to one. Monopolies are not "there's only one product." People love spouting monopoly to every mainstream product like iPhone and Windows.

YouTube has plenty of competition in video hosting. There's more professional high cost ones like Netflix. Less giving but just as easily accessible is TikTok. Hell there's even PornHub.

Just because YouTube has a unique combination of services that has allowed self employment for many people that can't get it easily on existing sites does not mean that competition does not exist. Many content creators on YouTube actually advertise a competing site on YouTube.

Before we can start offering solutions we need to have a good understanding on what the problem is and what it isn't.

[–] Smoogs@lemmy.world -5 points 1 year ago

Don’t want the risk of culpability ? Don’t want to consider others? Feel entitled? Then go Create your own distribution.

[–] Smoogs@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

YT is a private company supplying a server. They can set their own policy (TOS which is neither enforceable by law for either side) and they don’t actually owe anyone their livelihood. It’s like getting kicked off of any platform,even Etsy. Etsy doesn’t then owe you money that you could have made. You don’t own potential money. It’s not promised to you. They are a platform. Not your distributor. And even at that you can be kicked from a distributor anytime as they can also have policies on content they will associate with. If they decide it’s disagreeable, that in itself is a breach of contract.

[–] 13esq@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think the debate is whether YouTube is allowed to choose who is or isn't on their site, but whether it is OK to subject someone to the result of a trial by social media.

If someone made an accusation against you, would you think it'd be right of your employer to sack you, or would you like the chance to defend yourself legally first?

[–] Smoogs@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

he’s not EMPLOYED by YouTube. That is not what this is.

[–] prole@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 year ago

YouTube doesn't need to presume shit. You're confusing YouTube with the US government.

[–] nucleative@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, I don't know anything about this guy but this is an alarming decision if the headline is accurate.

[–] pineapplepizza@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

It's more alarming if he is innocent