David Icke's Youtube channel deleted

[MrMobodies]

I saw in the newspaper today some conspiracist channel got taken down.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/david-icke-youtube-page-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory-a9496236.html

David Icke has YouTube channel deleted after linking coronavirus to 5G and ‘Jewish cults’
Former football commentator also had Facebook page removed

YouTube have deleted conspiracy theorist David Icke‘s account for violating its policies on sharing information about coronavirus. The 68-year-old has made several unproven claims about the virus on social media, including a discredited theory linking it to the 5G mobile network, blaming Jewish cults and claiming it cannot be transmitted through physical contact. The former football commentator, who has also claimed the world is run by reptiles and the royal family are lizards, also had his page on Facebook removed from the site on Friday and the broadcaster London Live was sanctioned for a recent interview with him. YouTube, which is owned by Google, told the BBC: “YouTube has clear policies prohibiting any content that disputes the existence and transmission of Covid-19 as described by the WHO and the NHS. “Due to continued violation of these policies we have terminated David Icke’s YouTube channel.”

Several famous medics including Dr Christian Jessen, of Channel 4’s Embarrassing Bodies, and former junior doctor Adam Kay have called on social networks to remove Icke from their platforms. They are backed by the Centre for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), who claim Mr Icke’s conspiracies over Covid-19 have been viewed more than 30 million times. “We commend YouTube on bowing to pressure and taking action on David Icke’s channel,” said CCDH’s chief executive Imran Ahmed. “However, there remains a network of channels and shadowy amplifiers, who promote Mr Icke’s content [and] need to be removed.”

They asked for other networks to follow the lead, and added: “It is time for Instagram and Twitter to follow Facebook and YouTube by acting to remove Icke and his content from their platforms. “Lies cost lives in a global pandemic, and their failure to act promptly puts us all at risk.” Before his YouTube account was deleted, it had 899,000 subscribers.

Edit: Got name wrong.

A first I mistook it for David Anthony Steele until I saw a photo as mentioned in this thread about Street lamps, 5G and Nazis technology:
https://www.eevblog.com/forum/chat/lunatic-claims-5g-streetlighting-uses-nazi-weapon-technologies/

David Anthony Steele's channel is still there with the conspiracy 5G stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsAwM1EqcYXKeIEufJqwWjw

[AlfBaz]

So we are pulling platforms from demented nutjobs, I guess that's the end of modern politics on social media then, especially orange ones

[bd139]

Woohoo some good news at last.

Anthony Steele's channel is still up although he hasn't posted anything for a week. Hopefully the fucker has been bagged and tagged.

[Gyro]

Someone should have taken him out when he was a second rate sports reporter! 
(Icke)

[magic]

“YouTube has clear policies prohibiting any content that disputes the existence and transmission of Covid-19 as described by the WHO and the NHS.”

LOL, what else on YT has to be approved by the UN?

[mc172]

Whilst this really is excellent news, it's also really bad news because it's "evidence that the main stream media don't want you to know THE TRUTH" etc etc...

[Cyberdragon]

Whilst this really is excellent news, it's also really bad news because it's "evidence that the main stream media don't want you to know THE TRUTH" etc etc...

Don't worry, they screamed the same thing when we used to contain them in asylums.

[Mr. Scram]

Whilst this really is excellent news, it's also really bad news because it's "evidence that the main stream media don't want you to know THE TRUTH" etc etc...

They will think that regardless. Do you really think any nut is ever convinced by even the most overwhelming body of evidence? Hell, even regular internet folk tend to stay their course in the face of strong evidence. Few will turn around and go "you know, you have a point".

[DimitriP]

There are two types of "unproven claims".
Approved and dissaproved.

[vk6zgo]

Whilst this really is excellent news, it's also really bad news because it's "evidence that the main stream media don't want you to know THE TRUTH" etc etc...

Don't worry, they screamed the same thing when we used to contain them in asylums.

Asylums were horrible places, & empathetic people rightfully campaigned against them.
They also cost a fortune to run.
In an unlikely alliance of empathy & parsimony, they were closed down.

Of course, as always "the baby was thrown out with the bath water", & the poor old "loonies" were left to wander the streets or run conspiracy theory websites.

[John B]

Let's not forget the statement from the WHO promoting the idea that there was no evidence of human to human transmission of COVID-19.

Without the ability to promote bad ideas, we also lack the ability to bring light to issues and facts that would otherwise be censored by authoritarian governments and organisations.

 “The past was alterable. The past never had been altered. COVID-19 had never been transmitted from human to human. COVID-19 had always been transmitted from human to human.”

― George Orwell, probably

[cdev]

How can anybody say covid 19 isnt real?

[james_s]

How can anybody say covid 19 isnt real?

Well you can't see it, and if you're fortunate enough to live in an area where it hasn't hit hard then you can't really see the effects of it. If the actions taken to slow the spread work then it becomes even less visible. Even if a million people die most of us still won't personally know one of them. More so than that, many people are just in denial.

In the mind of a conspiracy theorist everything on the news is a lie. I've seen a lot of people who don't understand the concept of a stock photo or realize how prevalent they are in news articles touting the fact that the same photo being used in two different articles "proves" that it's a fake story. Most people are smarter than that but a small minority can make a lot of noise.

[Cyberdragon]

How can anybody say covid 19 isnt real?

How can anybody say Earth is flat?

[magic]

How can anybody say covid 19 isnt real?

Covid is a real result of 5G deployment.

Here, I did it Soon it will be a crime so hurry up if you want to post such things too

Let's not forget the statement from the WHO promoting the idea that there was no evidence of human to human transmission of COVID-19.

Yes, and Polish government experts saying that masks are pointless and banning importing them from China, only to change their mind a few weeks later and mandate that everybody wears them outside for years until somebody comes up with effective treatment or a vaccine. Already a lot of people are starting to ignore that thing and I bet that if riots break over it in the middle of summer they will change their mind once again and even find some scientific justification. Politics is a farce.

I mean, politics is politics, but taking politics seriously definitely is a farce and possible sign of autism

[EEVblog]

Just like I said at the time with Alex Jones et.al, on principle I do not agree with removing channels like this. Or any channel for that matter unless the actually promote physical violence.

Anyone who doesn't see the bigger picture here, be careful what you wish for.
Youtube and other social media platforms get various publicly funded benefits, and the benefit of being legally protected as a platform, yet they want their cake and to eat it to by acting as a publisher. This is not right.

I would have no problem in principle with Youtube not promoting the content, or even demonetising the content, but I cannot agree with removing them from the platform entirely.
Platform like Youtube should be politically neutral. And if you think this ultimately doesn't boil down to politics, you are wrong.

[bd139]

The subscribers were promoting burning phone towers in the comment section. Same as Anthony Steele. As much as I agree with your point, you have to draw a line somewhere as it does end in violence. That is not politics, but merely legitimising violence and that is not acceptable by their policy or anyone with any ethical standard.

[Kevin.D]

Then you tube should have acted against the posters of those comment's or removed the comments or asked him to turn off or remove  those comments on any of his videos that promoted illegal action.  His video's don't contain anything illegal as far as I read and you tube shouldn't have removed them. If all it takes to get a video removed is for some of the comments to it promoting illegal activity then anyone who wants to get a video removed  can portray themselves as a 'supporter' and  post comments which are offensive or illegal.

It's really sad that youtube have started to cow tow to what some or other pressure group (old media included in them) want because they disagreed with the ideas being portrayed.  It's not illegal as far as I know to be a nut job or to have controversial or silly and outlandish views and ideas.

[bd139]

Anthony Steele for example was actually promoting the burning of phone towers specifically. Now I reported his videos to YT and they did nothing. Do you expect them to deal with comments if they can't deal with content producers?

Having silly and outlandish views and ideas is fine. But promoting ideas which are directly harmful is a really big problem.

Let's cite this as a fine example: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20200408-600-people-die-in-iran-from-drinking-neat-alcohol-to-cure-coronavirus/

[SerieZ]

You cheer now but next time they remove someone uncomfortable but reasonable. What then?
I personally firmly believe (unless they are comitting a crime against Individuals like slander and such) Ideas should be challenged, not censored and I really ought to think the people here would understand the reasons as to why that is.

And no, the loons who then go and commit crimes because of the crazy Ideas they heard should be judged for their crimes respectively and not collectively.

[bd139]

Well that's the thing isn't it. It's about balance. They didn't remove Icke, who has been talking crazy shit for years, until harm was actually done from people boosted by his ideas.  And then there's the other point where intentionally harmful ideologies are promoted. I don't see any whining about the latter.

As for judging people for their crimes respectively, it's probably better for society that we don't have victims where possible.

But in this case we do have victims so case closed, all bets are off. We have had infrastructure destroyed and staff threatened and assaulted here.

Where do you stand? I stand by case-by-case reason not a blanket free speech policy or blanket censorship both of which are harmful. Reason here is shutting a quite frankly stupid idea down.

[EEVblog]

The subscribers were promoting burning phone towers in the comment section. Same as Anthony Steele. As much as I agree with your point, you have to draw a line somewhere as it does end in violence. That is not politics, but merely legitimising violence and that is not acceptable by their policy or anyone with any ethical standard.

Report the comments, that's why Youtube has a report function.

[EEVblog]

Then you tube should have acted against the posters of those comment's or removed the comments or asked him to turn off or remove  those comments on any of his videos that promoted illegal action.  His video's don't contain anything illegal as far as I read and you tube shouldn't have removed them. If all it takes to get a video removed is for some of the comments to it promoting illegal activity then anyone who wants to get a video removed  can portray themselves as a 'supporter' and  post comments which are offensive or illegal.

Correct. Anyone could shut down one of my video or shut down my entire channel if you take this to it's logical conclusion. And if you think that hyperbole, I've already been threatened with this if I don't "modify my speech". 
And before anyone says "oh but this is obviously bad" etc do you realise how many channels have already been shut down and are at risk of being shut down because of all of Youtube's political viewpoints disguised as Terms Of Service? It includes virtually all independent news channels among many other genres of content.
This is where it leads, and this is why you have to defend the non-political "platform" nature of Youtube, or you risk losing everything.
It never stops at Alex Jones or David Icke, or insert countless hundreds of other channels.

It's really sad that youtube have started to cow tow to what some or other pressure group (old media included in them) want because they disagreed with the ideas being portrayed.  It's not illegal as far as I know to be a nut job or to have controversial or silly and outlandish views and ideas.

Nope, it's not illegal in the US, it's the old "Youtube is private company and can do whatever it wants" defense. That would be fine if Youtube et.al didn't get public monetary benefits and wasn't a strategic platform for politicians. So important that the US supreme court has ruled it so.

[EEVblog]

You cheer now but next time they remove someone uncomfortable but reasonable. What then?

Or worse, someone they like or follow.

I personally firmly believe (unless they are comitting a crime against Individuals like slander and such)

Slander, no, not possible. Slander can only be determined by a judge in a court ruling.
If Youtube is a platform then it should not matter what someone says. Although even extreme free speech advocated like myself have limits to this, like a call to violence.

[EEVblog]

Well that's the thing isn't it. It's about balance. They didn't remove Icke, who has been talking crazy shit for years, until harm was actually done from people boosted by his ideas.

No, it was done now because it was politically expedient to do so. No one gave a toss about him before all this.
He was not removed because of what people did with his rantings, he was specifically removed for "posting misleading information about the coronavirus pandemic."
and I quote directly from Youtube:
"YouTube has clear policies prohibiting any content that disputes the existence and transmission of Covid-19 as described by the WHO and the NHS,"
Read that again, in particular the "transmission" part. You aren't even allowed to question the transmission mechanisms or your youtube account could be terminated.
And remember, they didn't just remove one video, they deleted the entire channel.

And then there's the other point where intentionally harmful ideologies are promoted. I don't see any whining about the latter.

That's the official reason he was booted.

Where do you stand? I stand by case-by-case reason not a blanket free speech policy or blanket censorship both of which are harmful. Reason here is shutting a quite frankly stupid idea down.

If it was just this one person once during this crisis, I don't think many people would have a major problem with it. But the real problem lies in a pattern of behavior at Youtube that has results in the removal of hundreds of channels, and this will only get worse.
This is why I spoke out about Alex Jones as it was clearly the "canary in the coal mine", the publisher thought police slippery slope, and I was 100% right. It will only continue to get worse if people don't speak about about it. And sadly people like you will only care when it's someone or some channel, or some genre of content you care about.