And that's the exact reason why Youtube should be considered a platform, that Youtube is so viciously fighting now and all the Youtube believers are blindly accepting.
Not that I believe PragerU's videos are factful or informative, but I think the argument by the court that Youtube is not a state actor is completely missing the point, and it only shows how outdated the legal system is in the US, but it doesn't actually reflect on the actual situation, i.e. how much power Youtube is wielding, and how it is censoring and actively blocking free speech.
These kind of decisions shouldn't be granted to any private firms with such user and content size without public, democratic and transparent influence on the decision making.
BTW, all your arguments seems anecdotal to me. Sentences like "I see", "I feel", etc. don't really convince me and should not anyone else either.
And that's the exact reason why Youtube should be considered a platform, that Youtube is so viciously fighting now and all the Youtube believers are blindly accepting.
Not that I believe PragerU's videos are factful or informative, but I think the argument by the court that Youtube is not a state actor is completely missing the point, and it only shows how outdated the legal system is in the US, but it doesn't actually reflect on the actual situation, i.e. how much power Youtube is wielding, and how it is censoring and actively blocking free speech.
These kind of decisions shouldn't be granted to any private firms with such user and content size without public, democratic and transparent influence on the decision making.
BTW, all your arguments seems anecdotal to me. Sentences like "I see", "I feel", etc. don't really convince me and should not anyone else either.