Social Media Censorship: Jay Bhattacharya vs. Kate Klonick

  Переглядів 15,246

ReasonTV

ReasonTV

4 місяці тому

Stanford's Jay Bhattacharya debates St. John University's Kate Klonick on the federal government's role in social media censorship.
----------
Should the federal government be able to "urge," "encourage," "pressure," or "induce" social media companies into censoring free speech about COVID-19? A recent ruling in federal court said no. That ruling is the subject of this month's Soho Forum Debate between law professor Kate Klonick and professor of medicine Dr. Jay Bhattacharya. The resolution is: "The making of national internet policy was hindered, rather than helped, by the July 4th federal court ruling that restricted the Biden administration's communications with social media platforms."
Arguing for the affirmative is Kate Klonick, an associate professor at St. John's University Law School, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, and a distinguished scholar at the Institute for Humane Studies. Her writing has appeared in the Harvard Law Review, Yale Law Journal, The New Yorker, The New York Times, The Atlantic, The Washington Post, and numerous other publications.
Arguing against the resolution is Jay Bhattacharya, M.D. Ph.D., a professor of medicine at Stanford University. He is a research associate at the National Bureau of Economics Research, as well as a senior fellow at the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and at the Stanford Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. His research focuses on the economics of health care around the world with a particular emphasis on the health and well-being of vulnerable populations. His peer-reviewed research has been published in economics, statistics, legal, medical, public health, and health policy journals. Dr. Bhattacharya was one of three main co-signatories of the Great Barrington Declaration of October 2020, an open letter published in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdowns.

КОМЕНТАРІ: 224
@pseudonymous8702
@pseudonymous8702 4 місяці тому
is it just me, or was every attempt at opposing Jay's views an unintelligible word salad?
@bsmithhammer
@bsmithhammer 4 місяці тому
Yup. And an attempt to twist everything into merely being Jay's "opinion" rather than objective findings of the court.
@lukefrahn8538
@lukefrahn8538 4 місяці тому
And to downplay fascist behaviour that killed millions of people as one mans personal beef with authority
@jimbob2810
@jimbob2810 4 місяці тому
It wasn't just you. Where it was possible to deconstruct the word salad, she advocated for coercive censorship.
@tuckerbugeater
@tuckerbugeater 4 місяці тому
It's all just a drama while they prepared to release the next bio weapon
@kurtoverley6560
@kurtoverley6560 4 місяці тому
This was Kate’s audition for DHS’s Disinformation Governance Board
@SuperMayhem81
@SuperMayhem81 4 місяці тому
Wow. She won’t even respond to a lot of the questions addressed to her. She is part of the problem.
@thedrunkenchefs4577
@thedrunkenchefs4577 4 місяці тому
She's an obvious apologist for authoritarianism.
@tuckerbugeater
@tuckerbugeater 4 місяці тому
There are a lot of authoritarians in the USA if you haven't noticed in the last decade or two
@jackiechilds8047
@jackiechilds8047 3 місяці тому
She showed up with filthy, greasy hair.
@mariahrossi3072
@mariahrossi3072 4 місяці тому
Jay did an amazing job of show us how the government trampled on our free speach rights and why it matters. Thank you for speaking out! You have been an excellent warrior during covid and for western values.
@clarkrocks13
@clarkrocks13 4 місяці тому
If a platform is blocking or lowering visibility of posts/information, they are no longer merely a distributor. They are determining what will be seen and are thus a publisher. They should be held liable for blocking accurate information from their platforms.
@howardroark3736
@howardroark3736 4 місяці тому
I think it’s quite telling that the speaker in favor of censorship tried to blame the Trump administration for the censorship, as if which people were in power is relevant to whether censorship was okay at all. “No, it’s Orange Man’s fault, you can’t blame us! Our censorship is good!” 😂
@bsmithhammer
@bsmithhammer 4 місяці тому
It is quite telling. She tried to twist it into a partisan issue when it clearly wasn't. She's really just trying to absolve the Biden Admin of any wrongdoing.
@andrewnickell5516
@andrewnickell5516 4 місяці тому
Love this
@harrymills2770
@harrymills2770 4 місяці тому
@@bsmithhammer It is a partisan issue. Partisans for the donor class versus partisans on the side of liberty.
@bsmithhammer
@bsmithhammer 4 місяці тому
@@harrymills2770 Ok, sure. But I think it's obvious that I was using the word in the traditional sense, referring to the two dominant parties.
@Snipergrey
@Snipergrey 4 місяці тому
Yup. Before the left picked up the v a x ball and really ran with it, I predicted they would throw D J T under the bus if it proved faulty or dangerous.
@naturesden4485
@naturesden4485 4 місяці тому
Thank you Jay 100% believed in you from the start. I appreciate all the hard work that you've continued to put into this blessing brother
@jimbob2810
@jimbob2810 4 місяці тому
Well done, Dr. Bhattacharya! Thank you for your courage during the Covid catastrophe, and for continuing the good fight.
@Jeff-dx2cm
@Jeff-dx2cm 4 місяці тому
Wow was she unimpressive. Didn't even know the case as well as the doctor did. What a joke
@laurelvanwilligen9787
@laurelvanwilligen9787 4 місяці тому
Loved Dr B from the first couple of month of lockdown (early 2020). Still love him. What a national treasure.
@youtrickube1475
@youtrickube1475 4 місяці тому
If this woman(?) is not being intentionally disingenuous then she is sadly delusional.
@ConiferCreates
@ConiferCreates 4 місяці тому
I am flabbergasted that Kate didn't understand why people thought she was advocating for censorship. Was she listening to the same words coming out of her mouth as I was? She seemed to show an immense misunderstanding of not only the way her words would be perceived, but also of what the opposing stance was. I don't think I've ever been disappointed by a SOHO debate this much for just how weak of an argument was presented by one of the sides until this one.
@CarrotCakeMake
@CarrotCakeMake 4 місяці тому
She understood. She was doing North Korea strats. There are no concentration camps in North Korea because that's not what they call the camps.
@justifiably_stupid4998
@justifiably_stupid4998 4 місяці тому
Her thesis that she was trying to get across was that free speech is not possible without strict regulations that govern all the world's platforms.
@johnthomas6473
@johnthomas6473 4 місяці тому
In a survey, "94 percent of ... Harvard students said they have self-censored in conversations with their peers before; 88 percent have felt they could not express an opinion because of how others would respond; and 36 percent reported being more likely to self-censor now than when they started at Harvard." I'm sure it's similar at Harvard. Basically, they're in a bubble. When she is in her bubble, her position probably is relatively moderate. Of course, her bubble results in her being unable to make a compelling case to those outside of her bubble.
@douglasborgstrom2023
@douglasborgstrom2023 4 місяці тому
Jay is correct. Would you believe the same people who censored you for your opinion? .
@martinjohnson5498
@martinjohnson5498 4 місяці тому
Ms Klonick strikes me as someone who, owning a small store and visited by a couple of very large men saying, “Nice little store you have here, be a shame if something bad happened to it” would think they are her friends. If the government’s efforts were so benign and fair, why were they done in secret? She makes a number of dishonest or disingenuous or hypocritical statements. I do not think she is stupid, so I conclude she speaks for evil.
@davidatkinson2221
@davidatkinson2221 4 місяці тому
This
@Libertariun
@Libertariun 4 місяці тому
She does, sadly, speak for the government against us the people. Shame as she seems like a good person.
@tuckerbugeater
@tuckerbugeater 4 місяці тому
You can go form your own little ghetto And eat grass
@fredgarvinMP
@fredgarvinMP 3 місяці тому
​@Libertariun She speaks for the "liberal world order".
@fredgarvinMP
@fredgarvinMP 3 місяці тому
​@@LibertariunShe may have been a good person at one time.
@SeedsofEcofrog
@SeedsofEcofrog 4 місяці тому
We must never forget when they coerced the children for use as shields to temporarily and marginally "protect" adults.
@imnotsmartbutimdumb
@imnotsmartbutimdumb 4 місяці тому
We sacrificed our children’s generation so like 7 80 year olds could survive another 8 months. There is no way to describe that trade other than completely batshit insane.
@CarrotCakeMake
@CarrotCakeMake 4 місяці тому
No, they sacrificed children to avoid having to admit that they were full of crap from the start. They don't give a damn about the elderly either, or they would have respected their wishes not to be used as an excuse.
@jonnynice8366
@jonnynice8366 4 місяці тому
And then they suddenly and unexplainedly because MUCH more susceptible to infection.
@innernouter
@innernouter 4 місяці тому
In her World, this debate would have a warning label. It would of course be for your protection.
@thermionic1234567
@thermionic1234567 4 місяці тому
It does! Didn’t you see the CDC Covid-19 link appended to this video that is mandatory on UKposts for every dissident Covid video?
@andrewnickell5516
@andrewnickell5516 4 місяці тому
Parlour was censored! This woman is crazy
@shannonhealey704
@shannonhealey704 4 місяці тому
Her hand movements echo the flailing nature of her attempted position. Unintelligible. The class and intellect Dr. Jay demonstrates in his earnest attempt to decipher and address her garbled stance, drives his point professionally. We are being drowned in this country, by foundation-less rhetoric. Reason and evidence are endangered animals and should be protected.
@jefferygardner22
@jefferygardner22 4 місяці тому
It doesn’t matter which government the censorship happened under. Government involvement in deciding what opinions should be heard is wrong under any government.
@ivesguy7568
@ivesguy7568 4 місяці тому
Remind me again, who thought it was a good idea to put politicians in charge of health care? Appreciate Jay putting truth out there. But, do we really need 'gov agencies' to behave 'better' or maybe just get gov out of the equation?
@robfromvan
@robfromvan 4 місяці тому
You mean someone is debating in favour of censorship?!!! 😮😳🙄😢
@tbizness27
@tbizness27 4 місяці тому
Kate is utterly clueless on what transpired over the last few years
@Libertariun
@Libertariun 4 місяці тому
Unfortunately I think she is very clever, and if she claims not to know, it’s more of a strategy for not admitting to wrongdoing than ignorance. She’s clearly not ignorant.
@EquippedwithStrength
@EquippedwithStrength 4 місяці тому
When I was a kid my parents would invite their friends over for dinner. These friends had a teenage daughter who would sit and look so bored by it all, like why should she even bother making an effort to be friendly. She pulled faces just like Kate did. Though I don’t *think* Kate is a teenager. She just came across so rude.
@MissLibertarian
@MissLibertarian 4 місяці тому
I was censored. The courts need to defend my rights as authorized by the People, and the People need to replace legislators that won’t. Speech is for everyone, including listeners. Expression is the last stop before violence. No one has a mandate to control the feelings of others; because we are each responsible for our feelings we must be able to express them.
@wilmahailey4398
@wilmahailey4398 4 місяці тому
Well done Dr. B. You have been a beacon for 3 yrs. now. Thank you !
@mdhen4
@mdhen4 4 місяці тому
She is exaggerating the confusion regarding covid policies. Policy makers were ignoring the science and rational decision making. Edit: she only gets worse the more she talks. Her ilk want to crush any disagreement with their warped view of the world
@DarinFilms
@DarinFilms 4 місяці тому
Thank you Jay - I always believed in you from the time you founded the GBE. Keep it up! This is the most important debate on censorship of our time! Everyone needs to watch it in order to ensure it doesn't happen again! That the government is NEVER allowed to censor free speech and never allowed to abuse its power.
@wolf5505
@wolf5505 4 місяці тому
According to 'Law Professor' Kate Klonick, the Bill of Rights was authored to protect the rights of CORPORATIONS. Embarrassing.
@DarkHorseSki
@DarkHorseSki 4 місяці тому
Wow, from the very start I saw that Kate Klonick's arguments were not just flawed, but demonstrably against the facts in many cases. She lost this debate without even needing anybody to do more than just say, go check the facts. Every time she speaks, she just denies reality and sees things in just a most simple, life in a vacuum, way. She doesn't even understand the Section 230 protections and reasoning of the CDA. Over and over she demonstrated a complete lack of 1A understanding too. SMH.
@johnthomas6473
@johnthomas6473 4 місяці тому
I watch debates often, and usually, I can learn something from both sides being debated. I am sorry to say that in this one, I was embarrassed for Klonick. Bhattacharya laid out specific claims against government censorship, as well as a philosophical case on the importance of open dialog. Her retort was essentially "Trump did it too," and "you're 'big mad' about you being suppressed." It truly was embarrassing, but I think it is likely the result of a prevalent disease at educational institutions, including Ivy League schools. A recent survey showed "94 percent of ... Harvard students said they have self-censored in conversations with their peers before; 88 percent have felt they could not express an opinion because of how others would respond; and 36 percent reported being more likely to self-censor now than when they started at Harvard." These professors are unlikely to even encounter a critical student's voice, so they have an overly inflated view of the merits of their own view. Therefore, when they finally face an intelligent adversary, they are easily crushed. And that gets to the heart of the debate, doesn't it? When one side is censored, as is too often the case at universities and on social media, the side with the approved opinion ultimately becomes overly confident, and under-researched. The results are embarrassing for them.
@danielj.rhoads1622
@danielj.rhoads1622 4 місяці тому
This debate and Olivia Troye's congressional testimony show the utter poverty of the justification for the censorship industrial complex. It also shows that plenty of otherwise intelligent people in high places are A-OK with these authoritarian measures.
@hemlock527
@hemlock527 4 місяці тому
Who'd have thought that piercings and tattoos would come to symbolise the authoritarian?! Orwell, that's who!!
@pwcrabb5766
@pwcrabb5766 4 місяці тому
Woman word salad Obtuse and obfuscated Clarity avoidance Listener bewildered
@tann_man
@tann_man 4 місяці тому
Has a woman ever done well at Soho?
@VeniVidiVid
@VeniVidiVid 4 місяці тому
1:31:54 “We have come to this middle ground in which private platforms which have their own first amendment rights have a right to construct and to create, basically, a curated space as they want to curate it. Should the government have much say in that, not a lot, but some say in that, in a multi stakeholder society, in a pluralistic western democracy?” No. Absolutely not. It’s explicitly prohibited in the First Amendment of the Constitution. Government is not a “stakeholder“. They are the people we hire to make and uphold laws. They have the guns and the prisons to do that. It’s why we are NOT a “pluralistic western democracy“. We are a constitutional republic. That constitution limits government authority and action. Even if a majority of citizens want to vote to limit speech on any given topic, the Constitution forbids government from limiting it.
@bsmithhammer
@bsmithhammer 4 місяці тому
I think we need a Venn diagram that illustrates the overlap between cultural fascists and people who have nose piercings.
@jaycarver4886
@jaycarver4886 4 місяці тому
I had not seen this before commenting on the piercing. She is a sheep so maybe a ring through the nose would be more appropriate.
@detroit12870
@detroit12870 4 місяці тому
I LOVE me some Venn diagrams. They're so complex
@dangrimes6200
@dangrimes6200 4 місяці тому
Incredibly ignorant statement, OP. But i will support your right to say it, via 1A, even if 2A is needed. Btw, i love nose piercings, and most people in my circle who have them are libertarian. Maybe we just have diff experiences :)
@petervanness3207
@petervanness3207 3 місяці тому
Prof. Klonick lost me in her opening remarks when she implied free speech could harm public safety and public health. I believe quite the opposite is true. Societies enhance Public safety and public health by promoting and defending free speech.
@paulschultz2751
@paulschultz2751 4 місяці тому
I am amazed that SOHO found anyone with the courage to show up and have an honest debate so I am thankful Kate was willing to take the stage. On the downside I now consider it amazing that two opposing views actually have a reasonable debate. I for one started to resist the Biden regime narrative when the FDA claim it would take 75 years to do a document review to respond to a FOIA request for the Pfizer clinical trial date. Then a federal judge forced the disclosure in 1 year. Yup my trust in the FDA is gone. I doubt my trust will return after the illegal Biden mandate forced my medical employer to fire me in the middle of a pandemic for refusing the experimental product line not a vaccine. Given the skyrocketing excess deaths world wide I am confident I am on the right side of history.
@hugoveracandia3562
@hugoveracandia3562 4 місяці тому
The question the girl asks at 1:17:17 is critical, it cornered Kate. Especially when she asks "about certain security considerations for censoring certain information." I think that at that point the moderator considered the question not relevant, since it would seem that it is adopted as a judge's position, and not as a question. That is why Jay is asked if he can defend her before such an inquisition. Excelent debate, proof that the free expression of ideas is still working.
@clarkrocks13
@clarkrocks13 4 місяці тому
47:00 She says platforms can choose what to censor or limit visibility on. As if current and “former” government agents aren’t in pretty constant contact determining what to censor and limit. Twitter files have been out for awhile now.
@tomkarnes69
@tomkarnes69 4 місяці тому
The telephone company has determined your speech is "Misinformation", you will need to turn your phone in immediately ma'am
@eijiookami6789
@eijiookami6789 4 місяці тому
She's using a whole lotta buzzwords that often mean the exact opposite of what they sound like. Newspeak straight out of Orwell's 1984. And these people call themselves the "elite?" Disgusting.
@Christina-lm1st
@Christina-lm1st 4 місяці тому
That's what they do.. only it's not working anymore. Wonder what the cornered creatures will try next ☠🤡👹👽 🍿🍿🍿
@johnl5316
@johnl5316 4 місяці тому
Not enough volume
@user-iz2cb2ti9j
@user-iz2cb2ti9j 4 місяці тому
My comment questioning the safety of the Messenger RNA injections was just censored.
@pattifisk1829
@pattifisk1829 4 місяці тому
Thank you, Dr.Jay😊
@salmonfreak
@salmonfreak 4 місяці тому
Kate seems to think it's OK for the government to talk with social media companies about content moderation. We know they did alot more than just dialogue or talk but nonetheless I wonder if she would say the same thing about the media? Should the government send people into the editorial rooms of the MSM in order to make sure they understand "wink wink" the régime's narrative?
@MillieMe05
@MillieMe05 3 місяці тому
I’m pretty sure they do. That’s why I only listen to alternative media.
@jacobnussbaum2309
@jacobnussbaum2309 4 місяці тому
Honestly what a sad debate. I wish they fielded someone more qualified to argue against Jay. I wanted to encounter new ideas that challenged what I already believed, not some lady with no coherent understanding of the situation substantiate her position merely by direct refutation. There definitely is room for some interesting debate on the issues. Destiny's debate about the Twitter files with some of the journalists involved was much more robust. This woman clearly was not prepared for the medium of debate and argument for fielding ideas.
@MillieMe05
@MillieMe05 3 місяці тому
Destiny is a skilled debater.
@fredgarvinMP
@fredgarvinMP 3 місяці тому
The first amendment is really quite simple and the government clearly trampled on it. I haven't seen any interesting arguments from the pro-censorship crowd.
@MissLibertarian
@MissLibertarian 4 місяці тому
I’m suspended by NextDoor because they cannot express their true reason, and since I had not violated their TOS I have no incentive to provide them with my reading or writing services. I suspect they were feeling squeezed by the periodic vocal floggings administered in Congress and their natural desire for eyeballs and market share.
@hubrisnaut
@hubrisnaut 4 місяці тому
The best part of this display of sociopathy by 'Kate' is it's licensed as 'Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)' You can share this.
@lacky9320
@lacky9320 4 місяці тому
Wow, the questioners are killing this lady. 'no comment'
@pansa0154
@pansa0154 4 місяці тому
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt. - Abraham Lincoln(?)
@fredgarvinMP
@fredgarvinMP 3 місяці тому
Jay Bhattacharia is a great man. His simple, logical arguments triumphed.
@thermionic1234567
@thermionic1234567 4 місяці тому
At 1:09:00 Kate decided it was smart not to speak. She should have done that much earlier.
@HarryPainter
@HarryPainter 4 місяці тому
Can’t believe she’s with IHS 🤢
@bloominguez
@bloominguez 4 місяці тому
Ridiculous that I have to look at that "information" panel the whole time this plays.
@breakupgoogle
@breakupgoogle 4 місяці тому
Dr Jay is based af
@malvoliosf
@malvoliosf 4 місяці тому
Dr. Klonick’s strategy might be called a “parade of reasonables”. A parade of horribles is an attempt to paint a reasonable proposal by inventing a plethora of horrible things that might possibly happen, with the idea that the opponent should have to address each one. This parade of reasonables, an innovation so far as I know, is an attempt to paint a horrible proposal by inventing a plethora of reasonable things that might possibly happen. Could government oversight of speech, despite its horrendous history, with Dr. Bhattacharya one of its much lesser victims, somehow do all these reasonable things, and not continue its evil ways? Candidly, I am skeptical, but it doesn’t matter. This country has chosen the path of freedom and we are happy with it.
@jamiehousholder415
@jamiehousholder415 4 місяці тому
Wow. Thank God she wore her nose ring. Otherwise I would never take her seriously.
@justifiably_stupid4998
@justifiably_stupid4998 4 місяці тому
I'm trying to make the opening pro position as coherent as possible, but I am failing. Why do the private platforms go to government for expert opinion, when private platforms are themselves the experts?
@J434my
@J434my 3 місяці тому
Hope she got paid well. Takes a large pair to get up there and waffle in defence of something so obvious wrong.
@MissLibertarian
@MissLibertarian 4 місяці тому
All infants are born without manners (they do shake hands). It is pointless to design any rules aimed at perfection in social behavior. The best place for offensive (actual of metaphorical) expression would seem to be online where it is documented, readily avoided, or countered. Oops, too rude? Everybody has to learn how to avoid this whether sending or receiving. Let rattlesnakes keep their rattles.
@EntropiaFilm
@EntropiaFilm 4 місяці тому
@youtube I want individual sound controls for different video content and also for the ads in that video
@MillieMe05
@MillieMe05 3 місяці тому
Why does this law professor think this debate is about Trump? I’m confused.
@sebastianforbes1
@sebastianforbes1 4 місяці тому
as soon as someone says, "let me give you the facts", I think, "what facts are you not telling me ?"..
@schenksteven1
@schenksteven1 4 місяці тому
12:20 - The debate starts
@fredgarvinMP
@fredgarvinMP 3 місяці тому
The smackdown starts🙂
@funincluded
@funincluded 3 місяці тому
“To maximize freedom of speech.. ehem… while also balancing that with our concerns on misinformation” 😂 ok
@thermionic1234567
@thermionic1234567 4 місяці тому
Of course there is a link below this debate to the CDC about Covid. Any chance this debate is linked to the CDC site as a (half) alternate view? Of course not!
@funincluded
@funincluded 3 місяці тому
Even her outfit is contradicting itself
@j.a.p.818
@j.a.p.818 4 місяці тому
Is this video too quite, or shadow-banned?
@fredgarvinMP
@fredgarvinMP 3 місяці тому
It seems so. Probably put on UKposts's trends blacklist.
@RcCapozzi
@RcCapozzi 4 місяці тому
Jay's the man!
@Edweird2w1
@Edweird2w1 4 місяці тому
Future Resolution suggestion: Leaving the SOHO forum Celebratory tootsie roll at home during a free speech debate results in anarchy in live audience questions.
@MillieMe05
@MillieMe05 3 місяці тому
I don’t know who this woman is but her arguments are not logical. Parler did not go down because of lack of public support and Musk did not lose advertising because the platform is not popular. She needs to pay attention to more than just Liberal sources if she is actually going to be informed enough to not look ridiculous in a debate.
@lcl1016
@lcl1016 4 місяці тому
She’s institutionalised
@stevenfry6520
@stevenfry6520 3 місяці тому
It is this simple - I want access to ALL information/opinion & will decide for myself! Vigorous public debate is the only way, if ‘you’ are ‘right’ friggin’ convince me - I ain’t stupid & I see your con
@AF-we1zc
@AF-we1zc 3 місяці тому
Wasn't "national internet policy" something she wanted and something Jay opposes? In this case the court ruling did hinder "national internet policy" or am I not understanding things correctly.
@I.identify.as.a
@I.identify.as.a 4 місяці тому
What a weird way to defend communism
@phprofYT
@phprofYT 4 місяці тому
I have bad news for everyone ... the bureaucracy is the problem. You want more "government" to fix "our nations problems"? Enter more bureaucracy. More bureaucracy never make the work better.
@douglasborgstrom2023
@douglasborgstrom2023 4 місяці тому
Platforms that offer publishing options can be regulated by the government. They cannot be censored.
@Godocker
@Godocker 4 місяці тому
Kate resorting to whataboutisms (Trump did it too) completely misses the point. These people are disgusting.
@dangrimes6200
@dangrimes6200 4 місяці тому
Yup. TDS at it's finest, haha
@micahkilpatrick9924
@micahkilpatrick9924 4 місяці тому
Kate had no chance of winning.
@stevenslane3074
@stevenslane3074 4 місяці тому
She is DANGEROUS !!
@aslkdjfzxcv9779
@aslkdjfzxcv9779 4 місяці тому
a silly feeble women, the tool of tyranny. and her co-conspirator, the limp male.
@skytech2501
@skytech2501 4 місяці тому
keep her out of office
@bsmithhammer
@bsmithhammer 4 місяці тому
Her condescending arrogance is really tough to listen to. And she was clearly ignoring key parts of the court ruling, and/or trying to twist them into merely being Dr. Bhattacharya's opinions, when they were the actual objective findings of the court.
@youtrickube1475
@youtrickube1475 4 місяці тому
That Lesbian had some mighty big balls arguing against the very thing that allowed her and her kind to openly argue in a public forum. Think I'll get censored?
@fredgarvinMP
@fredgarvinMP 3 місяці тому
Sort by newest to see the excellent but censored comments.
@jonmeador8637
@jonmeador8637 4 місяці тому
There's no constitutional right to social-media speech.
@spocko2181
@spocko2181 4 місяці тому
Says who?
@jonmeador8637
@jonmeador8637 4 місяці тому
@spocko2181 The Founders.
@bsmithhammer
@bsmithhammer 4 місяці тому
There's no constitutional right for the government to be moderating content on private platforms - try to keep up.
@alexdarren8432
@alexdarren8432 4 місяці тому
Social media speech? When did you come up with that term? Speech is speech, regardless if it’s on the street or on Twitter
@markn866
@markn866 4 місяці тому
This is a true statement, same as you have no free speech rights on my property.
@tuckerbugeater
@tuckerbugeater 3 місяці тому
"ignore the Trump question"
@tallard666
@tallard666 3 місяці тому
20:00 Jay makes great points about government censoriousness having replaced church censoriousness. There was a time when leftists, true leftists, would have recognised this as a harm. But something happened in the last 20 years. 2 things: 1- Liberation theology became mainstream, and they overtook mainstream parties and institutions, moralising do-gooders. 2- Atheists, who used to be critical thinkers and skeptics, became Gnu-Atheists, brought on by idiots like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins who falsely claimed that morality and "good" were universal natural traits, rather than social constructs invented by religious officials, and THEN adopted near universally by society. Harris and Dawkins are both obsessed with do-goodism, because Gnu-atheism, the second half of leftist mainstream takeover, is equal to safetyism. Good is indeed a culturally and geographically relative term. There is nothing in life that is universal other than sky, river, land, SEX, food, water, air. All geographies and time brought about different cultures and moral structures. These things are entirely relative. This is how the once honest LEFT became the powerful do-goodie fake left, mixing Capitalism with Charitocracy (Bill Gates), creating private-public corporate projects (Fascism). The mainstream Left is nothing like the original Left. And though I rarely side with people of faith on issues of "morality", I do agree that for the sake of social cohesion, somewhat uniform cultural values are important. But, from a true leftist perspective, a historical one, yes, we did want to interrupt the never-ending corporate hold on culture. The Left simply failed by becoming the exact thing we railed against.
@jcambeis
@jcambeis 3 місяці тому
Kate is a hack
@hubrisnaut
@hubrisnaut 4 місяці тому
I don't know if I can watch this all the way through for health reasons. I'll have to watch my vital signs. I've never seen a fascist defend themselves before.
@hubrisnaut
@hubrisnaut 4 місяці тому
I can't do this, I literally went to the store and bought vodka and cranberry juice, because I am an agent of the Slavics, the Chin, the black faces of white supremacy and the president of El Salvador
@rickfucci4512
@rickfucci4512 4 місяці тому
Attack the audience first? Where are we going
@hubrisnaut
@hubrisnaut 4 місяці тому
The 'argument' thus far is ;shut up'.
@jaycarver4886
@jaycarver4886 4 місяці тому
Cute nose piercing, Kate. NOT. It seems to be a liberal thing and never does anything to add to their attractiveness. I'm still stumped as to the reason for them.
@lukefrahn8538
@lukefrahn8538 4 місяці тому
Thought it was an unfortunate soldering accident. Never ever solder above your head.
@CarrotCakeMake
@CarrotCakeMake 4 місяці тому
"Hatred of the good for being the good.” -- Ayn Rand. Nose rings are purposely to look more ugly. It is a girl's way of saying that she hates that she was born attractive and will even stick metal into her own face to destroy beauty. A wise man would avoid such women.
@spocko2181
@spocko2181 4 місяці тому
A nose ring is used to control dumb animals.
@robertnaylor6119
@robertnaylor6119 4 місяці тому
Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego
@user-wl2xl5hm7k
@user-wl2xl5hm7k 4 місяці тому
*This is the **_only_** solution to prevent social media censorship (among solving countless other issues):* All types of intellectual property (IP) laws must be fully abolished immediately, in any and all jurisdictions worldwide. Against Intellectual Monopoly is the most informative book humanity has on the subject now. Against Intellectual Property is another incredible essay. _Only_ these two texts are the gold standard when it comes to intellectual property.
@user-wl2xl5hm7k
@user-wl2xl5hm7k 4 місяці тому
And I have a playlist (not _my_ videos) of *the* best videos on intellectual property laws on my channel for all interested.
@arnaldobellucci9033
@arnaldobellucci9033 4 місяці тому
Who needs innovation after all.
@user-wl2xl5hm7k
@user-wl2xl5hm7k 4 місяці тому
@@arnaldobellucci9033 Your comment makes no sense. You need to read the two texts I mentioned. You don’t know the true information when it comes to IP: according to empiricism and logic. Read them tonight, don’t waste any more time.
@deusvult1268
@deusvult1268 4 місяці тому
​@@user-wl2xl5hm7k It makes a lot of sense. There is a reason countries with IP laws developed the most. I don't think it should be abolished but the time limits should be shortened by a lot.
@user-wl2xl5hm7k
@user-wl2xl5hm7k 4 місяці тому
@@deusvult1268 Your second sentence is empirically and logically false. Why would you say something if you didn’t know it was true? Read the two texts I mentioned. Please don’t make any make any more public comments or statements about IP until you have that knowledge. You’re being ethically and rationally irresponsible here.
@Nemerson74
@Nemerson74 4 місяці тому
Suprising to see a bunch of blatant sexism and sexual oritenationism on a libertarian debate channel. We should challenge the ideas of people instead of dismissing them because of the person's characteristics.
@doubleandy
@doubleandy 4 місяці тому
Maybe those people aren't libertarians and are just here to troll
@Nemerson74
@Nemerson74 4 місяці тому
I'm so confused on the libertarian position here. I think it's up to the platforms to have the courage to choose to censor or not censor their platform. My question is, if I owned a social media platform, why should I be denied my ability to communicate with the government? If users do not like social media censorship, then they can simply not use it. I think businesses should be free to choose their policies.
@danlowe8684
@danlowe8684 4 місяці тому
As the social media company, you can dictate terms that censor content on your platform without having violated the 1st Amendment rights of the users. The government cannot censor the speech of its citizens without violating the 1st Amendment. So, when the government uses its influences on you to censor (via your platform) users with a certain opinion on a subject, you become an agent of the government and the censorship becomes unconstitutional. Taking social media out of it, suppose I write an op/ed column for the NY Times against the mayor's proposed increase in school funding and the editor throws it in the garbage. No harm done. However, if the mayor found out the column was running in tomorrow's edition, called the editor and said he would remove all newsstands in the city if it ran - and the editor then threw it in the garbage, it is unconstitutional.
@tann_man
@tann_man 4 місяці тому
The feds were explicitly asking these platforms to censor specific people and (true) "mis" information. You're delusional not to recognize the state is deeply involved with history's greatest propaganda/ surveillance technology ever invented.
@MillieMe05
@MillieMe05 3 місяці тому
Facebook interfered with an election. That’s a hard no. You need to think it through again.
@fredgarvinMP
@fredgarvinMP 3 місяці тому
What they ⬆️ said.
@markn866
@markn866 2 місяці тому
Best comment here.
@FreeBroccoli
@FreeBroccoli 4 місяці тому
It seems like she showed up to debate the fairly narrow proposition and he showed up to make a speech about something else. I agree with pretty much everything Dr. B said, but I would have changed my vote to her because she did a better job of defending the proposition than he did of attacking it.
@MillieMe05
@MillieMe05 3 місяці тому
I’ve listened to a lot of debates and I 💯 percent disagree. She is a totally inadequate debater.
@fredgarvinMP
@fredgarvinMP 3 місяці тому
​@lillianevairwin Couldn't agree more. For a lawyer she was full of fallacies.
@fredgarvinMP
@fredgarvinMP 3 місяці тому
​@@MillieMe05 Mu comment was put on trends blacklist.
@rickjames5998
@rickjames5998 4 місяці тому
Thumbnail misleading. Lady on thumbnail is hot. Woman on stage old and not hot. wtf
The Truth About Climate Change
6:31
John Stossel
Переглядів 2,4 млн
Эффект Карбонаро и пончики
01:01
История одного вокалиста
Переглядів 7 млн
Мы играли всей семьей
00:27
Даша Боровик
Переглядів 1,1 млн
Артем Пивоваров х Klavdia Petrivna - Барабан
03:16
Artem Pivovarov
Переглядів 7 млн
Jay Bhattacharya Lecture at MIT, April 4, 2024
1:51:07
MIT Free Speech Alliance
Переглядів 17 тис.
Doug Stanhope: 'Everything annoys me equally'
55:58
ReasonTV
Переглядів 123 тис.
India Sucks! Don't Ever Come Here
16:12
Small Brained American
Переглядів 4,5 млн
The UK banned puberty blockers. Here's why.
11:46
ReasonTV
Переглядів 4,8 тис.
What we saw at the UW antifa Palestine protest
1:01
ReasonTV
Переглядів 15 тис.
Plagiarism is bad. This is even worse. | Wrong Number
9:22
ReasonTV
Переглядів 34 тис.
The Internet is Worse Than Ever - Now What?
11:32
Kurzgesagt – In a Nutshell
Переглядів 7 млн
Remy: Fortnight (Taylor Swift Parody)
3:10
ReasonTV
Переглядів 10 тис.
Bill Kristol and Scott Horton Debate U.S. Interventionism
1:33:39
ReasonTV
Переглядів 150 тис.
John Della Volpe - Understanding Gen Z | The Daily Show
22:38
The Daily Show
Переглядів 294 тис.
Эффект Карбонаро и пончики
01:01
История одного вокалиста
Переглядів 7 млн