Why I'm a Defender of YouTube (vortex.com)

Lauren Weinstein writes: In a time of fascist politicians spouting simplistic slogans about race, religion, terrorism, and censorship, along with whatever other pandering platitudes they believe will win them votes, prestige, power, and control — it's worth remembering how much good the Internet brings us, and how much poorer we'd all be in so many ways for the shackling of Internet services like YouTube, in the name of such self-serving proclamations and damaging false solutions.

Comments

Re:Media bias and misrepresentations

[sumdumass]

My parents, for instance, would read the newspaper article about some incident or other, and have no way to judge whether the opinions and position were in any way correct

Your a bit young so I guess I should point out that in my parent's day, you simply wouldn't have opinion in newspaper articles. You would have statements by people related to the stories and the who, what, were, why, and when facts and the statements were clearly marks as somebody said something. That is old School Jounalism. The opinions were saved for the op-ed pages which everyone knew was not news but opinions and editorials. I recently saw someone citing an op-ed page as if it was reported fact when it was just someone's opinion so I guess no one can tell the difference any more.

Re:Who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lauren Weinstein appears to be a wackjob, from the looks of his twitter feed.

Re:Media bias and misrepresentations

[Okian Warrior]

I've found that the moment you try to correct one of these stories attributing a false statement to candidate-x, you are immediately labelled as candidate-x fan-boy. And it goes down hill from there.

To be fair, I *am* a Trump fan.

For the past decade or so we (ie - Slashdot readership) have lamented the high-level of corruption in politics, and have identified the root cause as campaign contributions in return for political favours(*). A games-theory analysis shows that any normal political candidate will end up catering to the wishes of corporate interests in order to get elected.

As an example, consider [then] Senator Obama's flip flop on telecom immunity six months before the election, and for which he received generous campaign contributions that allowed him to win the presidency.

We've often wished for a candidate who can avoid the soul-selling and do things in the interests of the people. In this election, we have two: Trump and Sanders.

I'm a fan of both. Having a Trump/Sanders election would be the best thing for this nation, and serve as a wakeup call to the elites.

The people are tired of corruption in politics, and want something in return for their votes.

(*) I'm referring to American politics, but it probably applies in other places, such as Canada, the UK, and Australia.