YouTube Removes R.F. Kennedy Presidential Candidate Interview
cnn.com
cnn.com
You can't tell me there isn't tons of misinformation on other topics, even harmful topics, that gets uploaded and viewed every day.
Where does it end? Why should YouTube get to decide what is correct and what is misleading information on every topic? The job of content moderation should be separated from the platform provider.
No such thing in nature or science that's 100% safe. It's okay if someone wants to talk about the edge cases that result in failure.
Why the downvotes? Asking for a friend.
Ultimately, from all this I think RFK is a bit of a nut, but there's a lot he's right about as well, which is very different from the view in the media that he's 100% nutty.
But then again this is pretty representative of our current public discourse and why people like Kennedy get traction, while making statements that can directly lead to very large numbers of deaths and perfectly preventable outcomes.
For perspective, Kennedy is primarying Biden.
This is crime bill Biden. Biden, during whose VP stint we built those concentration camps on the Mexican border. Biden who continues the droning of civilians. Etc.
Which of the two caused more "preventable outcomes?" Somehow, I'm more concerned with incarceration and killing than I am about censoring speech.
They're just moral-less entertainers trying to sell you snake oil on the internet
People were able to hear Trump give a nuanced view on abortion in 2016 because he had never spoken on the topic before-- certainly not as a Republican. Kennedy has already become famous for being anti-vaxx, so he'll be seen in that light regardless of what he says. But his family name and personal charisma might overcome that. We'll see.
We've just lived through the century of Bernays when propaganda/advertising came into its own. The science of manipulation was developed. But humans haven't changed significantly, so we're just as susceptible as we were in the early 1900s.
Even though I think RFK Jr is wrong about some of it, not taking enough factors into account, I welcome anyone's wild stances when backed with empirical evidence.
Your comment proves my point, though. He can clarify until he’s blue in the face, and people will ignore that and remember the zany things that have been attributed to him, even if he never said them.
Vaccines are safety tested, so if his actual stance was just that that should be but is not the case, he would still be a liar spreading dangerous misinformation.
But selectively excluding his most extreme claims as not being part of his “stance” is, well, another form of deliberate misinformation.
The majority of us are capable of engaging in typical discussions like the long-term efficacy of vaccines or other mundane particulars, but I have yet to encounter an individual who claims to be "merely asking questions" about vaccines and ultimately DOESN'T prove to be someone with whom I fervently desire to avoid talking to or even be in a room with, let alone someone I would vote into office.
Because the poles are so noisy, you won't here from me
The choices you're discussing lie comfortably within the sphere of normal discourse. I empathize with the fear though: It's hard to find support amongst civilized dialogue without it devolving into conspiracy about governmental machinations or similar notions.
That's an absurd stance to take. It's entirely okay to be skeptical of a vaccine that was made at a rapidly accelerated pace and that hasn't been out long enough to know about its long-term causes.
You can't apply the same safety profile to the Covid vaccine as you can to, say, the Polio vaccine.
When you wholeheartedly reject evidence that doesn’t support your preconceived judgement, you’re not being skeptical.
It’s thankfully not that many people.
I don't think that's true. I find people are fine with saying the covid vaccines have side effects, some people die of blood clots, they don't prevent all infections etc. In fact if you lie about that you come across as phoney.
On the other hand in spite of that vaccines save lives in most cases. With covid ones they saved a lot with older people but were a bit marginal with 20 years olds say.
What is unacceptable is pushing lies that cause a bunch of people to die unnecessarily. There's an estimate about 234,000 Americans died unnecessarily of covid through not getting vaccinated, which is quite a few. I'm ok personally with JFK jr getting booted from youtube to twitter to try to reduce that stuff a bit. (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/04/21/quarter-u...)
Militantly short-sighted. Like people will threaten you and your job if you say that it might be a slippery slope.