I've just been viewing a youtube vid (I'll post the link later probably in RSE when I can find where it was!)
I posted a comment in my usual non-aggressive style and waited to see the coment up in full. I got "Comment pending approval"
If someone does not want to see my pov posted on the web, they'll delete it. Mine probably will, because I can't see any of the "negative" comments that have been responded to by others. Mine isn't negative, but I DID post my thoughts in an honest way. (In direct response to another comment)
The rest of the 400 ish comments were very fawning and sappy, all in praise of the video, which was a 12 year old boy phoning a radio station.
I'll let you know if I get my comment posted.
But that's hardly about freedom of speech - any more than arguments which have happened when mods have deleted posts here come under the heading of
freedom of speech. Freedom of speech, at least as usually meant, deals with governmental control of speech, and the right of the citizen/subject to
There's no guarantee of freedom of speech - on YouTube, on this forum or indeed, in places such as LiveJournal (and in that, I'm not talking about recent changes, but rather the ability of the journal owner to delete things comments made by others).
I'm not at all convinced there should be "freedom of speech" on the web, to be honest. There are a lot of things I'd rather *not* have in the public forum.
I could imagine someone posting a person's real-life name, address, phone number, credit card numbers, perhaps an accusation that the person is a
pedophile or torturer of animals, or that he works for Al Quaeda. On a busy site, many people might read it before a moderator deleted it. It sounds
as if this site just requires human eyes to look at a post before it goes up. That seems reasonable to me.
We have a number of people here who are involved in web sites. If you had a really horrible experience from a post, would you put in a delay-for-approval step?
If the person who views posts selects only those to his liking, that would be different than the kind of safety-censorship of which I speak. Still, it's their "house."
But it's still not about freedom of speech ...
I'd agree it's about integrity- and have left fora and newsgroups that were run along similar lines.
Not because my freedom of speech was being denied but because there was simply no discussion.
That does sound suspicious.
I wouldn't imagine many people give much weight to the opinions posted. (Like the book review comments on a book jacket. How often do you even read a negative comment on them? )
There is no such thing as true freedom of speech, even in America. We all tend to modify our speech in some way to suit the context of the situation. Even here, we may allow some latitude, but we don't tolerate many things that are liable to cause offence to the greater community, libellous or illegal things. So, even here there is no freedom. I would hope, that we do not filter out dissenting views as appears to have happened in the you tube instance.
I had some comments on some of my youtube videos that I deleted.
One video was last year's highlight slideshow of the girl's volleyball team. A couple creepy, borderline pedofilic comments hit the waste bucket.
On one of my funeral for a soldier videos, someone made a crude, antiwar remark that was over the top, IMHO. ESPECIALLY since the soldier's widow linked the video to her myspace profile!
So it, too, hit the trash.
Other than that, I'm pretty lenient on allowing bad remarks about my work. If you are going to make art and put it out in public, you have to expect comments. -- good AND bad.