Comment by dathinab

you argument is basically nit picking negative aspects from one side, sometimes taking out of context, too, and then pretending you paint a very clear picture when in fact you do not

Firstly wrt. YouToube censorship a lot is abuse of the copyright system YT doesn't care about because it doesn't make them money. There is still ton's of "non-pharmaprofital" content and similar on YT which wouldn't be there if YT would systematically censor it.

Wrt. politicians while people tend put all kinds of labels onto politicians being "convicted" of hate speech is a very different thing. Not only is it not very common, but in close to all case I had looked into it was done very rightfully so. It's just that after the conviction some (most times) right wing propaganda sources love to ignore a lot of the fundamental aspects/claims/arguments the legal process was based on and then focused on some partial side point which by itself isn't enough to convict anyone for anything and pretends they where convinced for that.

And if you would be you I wouldn't write "even just questions". Because questions aren't necessary any less hate speech then non question. E.g. holocaust denier love to formulate their conspiracy theories in questions (and naturally will ignore or claim fake news if someone answers their questions). But just because you formulate a conspiracy theory as a row of question doesn't make it not a conspiracy theory. And the same for hate speech. You always have to take more then just a sentence into context, something legal proceedings tend to do, and something people hit by such proceedings tend to claim they don't.

In general YT "censorship" as in people abusing the copyright system and similar approaches to "take down" content they don't like is an issue, one which spawns to Google and other places, too.

But giving how much mis-information, propaganda and non-pharmaprofitable information and similar you find on YT _even if you are not looking for it_ claiming that there is a huge problem with systematic censorship _today_ is kinda dump. (Yes in the pandemic there had been and issue, for a short time, before it got replaced by banners. It was a very unusual station no one was quite sure how to handle and people did make mistakes. But taking a short period in history and pretending nothing else change since then when a lot changed isn't very useful).