
Recently, PragerU argued that Youtube has been "censoring" it's conservative views. Youtube had been removing advertisements and setting PragerU and censoring it's content to be "restricted mode" for adult viewing only. PragerU has around 2.5 million subscribers and is known for posting videos that attract a lot of criticism. For example they have posted videos that include masculine aggression and the nature of Islam.
Judges decided that the United States constitution's First Amendment was not being violated in this case. Youtube is a private company, therefore they have the right to censor anything posted on their platform. The court said "Despite Youtube's ubiquity and its role as a public-facing platform, it remains a private forum, not a public forum".
Personally, I agree with the courts ruling. Youtube is a private company therefore they may choose how the platform is run. In this case, Youtube only removed PragerU's advertisements and censored their video for adults, Youtube did not remove the users content. Due to PragerU being known for posting "criticized" videos, I believe Youtube has the right to censor videos so only adults can view them.
No comments:
Post a Comment