The argument about common carriers vs Youtube, Twitter, etc is fake. Supposedly we need to treat Youtube etc as more like common carriers in order to insure “free” speech. Supposedly new tech has blurred the line between publisher and carrier. Nonsense. The line is still perfectly sharp and clear.
1. There has never been free speech or “transparency”. It’s a myth created by the Endarkenment to help the rulers censor more sneakily. Censorship and secrecy are the PURPOSE of language. Every culture has taboos, and every ruler enforces taboos.
2. Youtube etc are Publishers in the full sense. They CHOOSE what they will monetize and spread. This is the function of a publisher. Freedom of the press means precisely that a publisher can CHOOSE what it wants to publish. Nobody can force a publisher to print or monetize what it doesn’t want to print or monetize.
3. The common carriers are STILL THERE. The wired landline system is still strong and still maintained by Bell Tel. The post office is still there and still works the same way. Both of these systems are common carriers in the full sense, and the structure of their technology makes it much harder for a ruler to treat them like publishers.
The problem is not in the algorithms of Youtube, the problem is that dissidents aren’t using the real common carriers. Dissidents use Youtube and EXPECT YOUTUBE TO PAY THEM FOR PUBLISHING PIECES THAT YOUTUBE REJECTS. This is crazy.
= = = = =
Later: Well then, WHY do the dissident influencers want us to keep trying Youtube, Twitter, etc? That’s easy. Influencers work for Deepstate, and they want us to keep pushing and failing in places where Deepstate can see us.
Polistra's Mill 