YouTube has been publishing rude versions of children’s cartoons for years…the BBC has just caught up in an outbreak of outraged primness….naturally the real target is the ‘Social Media’ giants and free speech….the BBC taking another tack on ‘fake news’….dressing it up as concern for unsuspecting kids’ moral health…
Is your child watching fake cartoons?
3 hours ago
Trending found a number of YouTube channels have fake versions of popular cartoons, often with scenes unsuitable for young children.
It’s no secret that the big broadcasting corporations have now declared war on social media. Specifically, they have declared war on ‘alternative news’. This means a war on anyone who has an opposing political view or narrative to those pursued by the msm. Big Media has seen what the proliferation of right-of-centre commentators on YouTube/Twitter/Facebook has done to their once impregnable ratings and they don’t like it one bit.
The biggest social media networks are run by regressive cowards who are naturally well-disposed to serve the interests of their corporatist comrades in the MSM, so censorship has now become a very real occurrence on social media networks – but it’s very much a one-way censorship; if you’re agreeably leftist and progressive, no problem, but if you think Trump might be a good idea, if you question the idea of a borderless Europe, if you think Islam might not actually be a Religion of Peace…well, you can expect to see your contributions deleted, censored, blocked or banned. ‘Ratings systems’ are all the rage with YouTube now. Just another way to conveniently disappear content they find uncomfortable.
The ‘tolerant left’: they own the media, the culture and the arts – where all opinions are welcome except, of course, the ‘wrong’ opinions.
I notice that after watching Post Pat there ..the next thing YouTube is this Toy Chubby Brown talking about Islam
“women you have rights”
” Well they did have rights until those twits took it off them”
“This cover yer face up ..it’s only the same as the Klu Klux Klan ..and then you’d take it off them straight away… same thing just a different coloured sheet”
and then this..
Some wee came out….
I listened to the BBCTr(uthB)ending episode yesterday.
Basically they went to YouTube “Oh this video site has 5 billion hits”
and Youtube replied “Yes well it’s frees-peech, if you wanna protect your kids you should be going thru the YouTube app cos it’s got filters”
You wouldn’t let your kids walk down a street full of hookers, and a drug dealer round the corner ..but that is what the internet is like ..It’s adult world.
If you are worried about that , then you should be in the same room supervising them.
Ha ha ha. The BBC have learnt that there is a proliferation of small news broadcasters, such as Mark Dyce, Rebel Media – the list is growing rapidly – and they all present the news directly and in most cases more professional than the over paid and under skilled numpties at the BBC. So they start by building up a campaign against the social media.
PJ Watson makes the interesting point that the conservatives have begun to predominate on Youtube, because they are able to make rational, well argued videos which get high ratings. Leftists are unable to do so as well because their views are propagated by soundbites and emotion, hence their videos get voted down and they tend instead to dominate on Twitter because the 40-character limit is better suited to emotional outbursts, shaming, sloganeering etc.
The left, however, have a problem – they can’t openly censor views they don’t agree with, because they have at least a nominal attachment to free speech – so it has to be done a. by using the withdrawal of advertising revenue as a form of blackmail, and b. by broadening the definition of ‘racism’, ‘hate speech’, ‘fake news’. We’ve already seen this with the expansion of the term ‘racist’ to include Islamist ideology, which is a value-system, not a race, and the creation of the nonsensical term ‘Islamophobia’, ie, an irrational fear of Islam, as a catch all term to shut down ANY debate.
However – whilst mainstream outlets are likely to shut down dissenting views, it would be difficult to do this across the internet as a whole. It could happen though – what they will probably do is target ISP providers, website providers etc rather than going after individuals. A similar method was used to enforce the smoking ban. The government knew there was no point making individual prosecutions, so they went after publicans, business owners etc instead.
They haven’t managed to stop piracy and they won’t shut down alternative news. The interweb is a whizz kids playground and the dinosaurs in charge haven’t got a clue how to handle it. Is the last truly free place open to normal people which is why it’s under relentless attack.
*The left, however, have a problem – they can’t openly censor views they don’t agree with, because they have at least a nominal attachment to free speech*
Alternatively, their real agenda is much more extreme than the one they can publicly admit to. They never tell the full truth about what they really want, for fear of disgusting even those they regard as their supporters.
In most cases, the hate slips out from time to time — e.g. calls for climate “deniers” to be executed or forcibly branded.
I am afraid that the ghastly Ambers natural inclination is for censorship and control.
I also remember that she ended up looking rather silly over the “hate crime” initiative (when both the figures and the interpretation of what a “hate crime” were basically meaningless and even then the numbers had not really risen and in addition she was also accused over a “hate crime” in one of her own speeches)
I suppose therefore she needs to show she is doing something about the misuse of U tube. And whilst I agree that something should be done about ISIS recruitment videos. Being a “liberal authoritarian” and wanting to prove what a “powerful operator” she is. Amber will not be able to resist to casting the net so wide so it inhibits alternative and “real” news sources such as Paul Joseph Watson and similar which threaten the liberal consensus.
Like all liberals. These depressingly cynical politicians can only see things in terms of a battle between the liberal establishment and the “right wing” and not in terms of the long term survival of our culture.
At the end of the day these creatures do not possess the imagination to realise that it is the establishment that has moved further to the left and not the rest of us, who only want to maintain our society in good order.
If she was really serious about protecting society perhaps she should be a bit more serious about reducing the availability of on line pornography – but as it probably is a huge money spinner for google etc – I expect little will be done on this.
Is this too much too ask? – Obviously!
I expect she missed out on being “head girl” at school and now we all have to suffer for it.
The BBC have such a fine history of child protection…