September 10, 2007
We Don’t Think YouTube is Biased, But The Edge Does
There are tons of gay- and lesbian-kissing videos on YouTube, and countless anti-racist, anti-anti-Semitic and anti-anti-American videos. (Just look at The Lavender Liberal’s pro-gay and anti-Bush videos alone!)
It is very likely that this particular video was targeted — freeped — and that’s why YT pulled it. There’s no excuse for ignoring a lot of complaints about a lot of other videos (YT seems more concerned about copyright violation than content), but this could well have been the result of an organized freep:
YouTube Censores [sic] Gay Kiss But Permits Gay Bashing
You may or may not have heard of a dust-up on YouTube. The site, which was purchased by Google for seven figures, is a bastion of do-it-yourself video. As the paradigm of online democracy, it is probably the last place you’d suspect would be homophobic. But some are accusing the hugely popular site of subversely [sic] supporting homophibia [sic] via its policies.
An apparently innocuous video of two teenagers, Luke and Noah, kissing for five seconds was reportedly removed from You Tube [sic]. The two young men have said that the video was submitted as proof of the special relationship between them, showing their affection for each other and hoping to remind the world that a kiss is just a kiss.
YouTube, however, didn’t see it that way. The site’s managers censored and restricted the video until protests brought it wider attention. What has activists’ hackles up are the numerous clips posted on You Tube [sic] by teenage boys where they call gay bloggers and others “faggot” and “cocksuckers.”
. . .
In March of this year, three teenagers in Alsip, Ill., a suburb of Chicago, allegedly attacked a younger teen and posted a video of the bashing incident on YouTube. Police were tipped off by a parent who overheard kids talking about the video. The police said that the teens, who were from several different area high schools, had told everyone to watch their attack on YouTube.
For the perpetrators of the attack, the chance to show off their action may have helped prompt it, according to published sources.
So, if the video posted to YouTube tipped off parents (who presumably tipped off the police), then it was a good thing the video was posted. Let’s hope more gay-bashers (who are going to bash queers one way or another) are stupid enough to post videos of their attacks.
The impact of the video has aroused public anger, mainly among LGBT activists, who are directing their ire at YouTube’s managers.
. . .
It should be noted that racist, anti-Semitic and even virulently anti-American videos are thrown up on the site for viewing with no editorial directives.
We say: It’s highly ironic that a writer condemnng YouTube for alleged censorship simultaneously blasts YouTube for a lack of “editorial directives.” You can’t have it both ways!
P.S. Dear Edge: See all those “[sic]’s” we had to insert in the quoted article? You need a proofreader, desperately. We’re good, and we work cheap.
Filed under: Free Speech, Hate Crimes, Youth
