London Mayor slams YouTube over failure to remove 'shocking' violent gang vids The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, has singled out Google's YouTube for failing to crack down on online videos that "inflame" gang violence and knife crime. YouTube has refused to take down four violent videos reported to them by the Metropolitan Police since December, which have been viewed 356,000 times. The Mayor's office …
"One way could be to make parents equally responsible for the actions of the child.
I'm not advocating this approach but you did ask for a solution to the problem."
Won't work, this has been tried before. All it does it lead to the breakdown of the relationship between parent and child, if it hasn't already been destroyed prior.
A better solution would be for police to apprehend and send those identified on the videos to institutions which could help or charge them with a crime, threatening behaviour is one such law that could be used; rather than the police spending their time asking Youtube to remove evidence so they don't have to do any work.
That is another possibility however the problem with those "institutions" is that they get a detrimental education in all things crime.
As someone who got on the wrong side of the law in my youth and spent time at hmp Hindley I can speak first hand about the information traded between criminals. Luckily I was not completely stupid and changed my ways (it was only remand because I absconded so I wasn't a hardened crim). However on release I then knew how to rob pretty much any car or motorbike and knew most reset methods for popular burglar alarms, never used them, never would.
It does not have to be either or. Parents need to do a better job, even though as some others have pointed out, many parents are not up to the task. yes, the Police should do more than just ask the videos be removed and visiting the thugs in them would be a good start. And, yes, often institutions for criminals, especially juveniles, can often be nothing but criminal prep schools. However, corporations reaping profits from the videos also need to do their part and not just make a quick buck from clearly anti-social, dangerous, and possibly criminal videos. Life is not a reality game show (the current prick in the white house notwithstanding) and it is rarely a clean binary option; there is a lot more shades of gray than definitive black or white. But, just because the issue is complicated and involves lots of players is not an excuse to do nothing.
@ABC.
If yoy are,a parent you are probably crap at it, part of being a parent is to.instill values and a sense of right and wrong in your children.
It is part of what you should be considering when you decide to have them , unfortunately a lot of parents now regard sex and child bearing as a ' fire and forget' experience, when the kids go wrong it is always someone else's fault.
Parents are responsible for how their kids behave a d should be held to task to some degree.
"
"How about parents do their part, instead of demanding corporations raise their children?"
Yes, that will be easy to implement. Please go ahead and fix this.
"
Just use the Darwin Awards. /s
On the serious side, you are pointing to OP to fix this when OP said the Parents themselves should fix it. What am I reading. If you are talking about a feasible way for the implementation, then it's easy. All the parents need to know is the Parenting 101 tips.
Parenting 101 tips
Rule #1: Take care of your kids.
Rule #2: Please take care of your damn kids.
Rule #3: Refer to Rule #1 and #2
Most parents don't take care of their kids, let alone being responsible for their kids. At most they feed the kids like any other pets, but that's not taking care of their kids. Kids doing drugs, joining gangs, skipping school; They all come down to one thing, the kids is having problems due to lack of care from their parents. And no, caring doesn't mean spying your kids 24-7, but giving support to the kid when they really need you.
Kids don't normally do drugs, join gangs or skip school, but they do when they are depressed, bored, and uneducated. Guess what? Taking care of the kids fixes all of them. Lead them something happy when they are depressed, give them something to do when they are bored, and educate them to avoid the bads are the simple basic of parenting. In return, the kids may at one point will take care of the parents when needed.
If they are too busy, lazy or incomptent to do that, youtube, gov't and/or whatnot aren't going to babysit for them. It's back to the Darwin Awards.
...is claim that Paul Joseph Watson made the video and they'll take it down immediately.
I don't want to live in a censored world where the likes of Mr. Khan get to decide what we can and cannot see. What makes *him* the arbiter of censorship in the UK?
I want to see these scum bags for the scum bags that they are, right out in open, whether it be members of violent gangs; racists; mysogynists; KKK; far-left Antifa; or Black Lives Matter.
I don't need the likes of Mr. Khan to hide it and obscure it, so that he and other members of government can claim that a problem that clearly exists, doesn't exist.
It's pure censorship.
It's pure censorship.
Actually it's worse than that - it's backdoor censorship.
If the content of these videos contravene any current laws, then Mr Khan or the police should prosecute the individuals concerned. If Mr Khan feels new laws are needed in order to criminalise the contents of these videos, well there's a procedure for that too.
But by trying to manoeuvre the likes of Google into performing the censorship without any law being broken, or any legal procedure having taken place, means the censorship would happen without any transparency or accountability whatsoever. Content would disappear into a black hole, administered only by internet companies' internal policies.
If Mr Khan wants to censor content that he finds distasteful, he should man up and call for a law that allows him/the government to do that, and take any electoral heat that results from passing such a law, instead of posturing.
The content of the videos contravene YTs own Terms&Conditions. The problem is that YT and many other tech companies like to hide behind web statements and do nothing to enforce them.
over a 60-day period it raised concerns in 526 cases where the site's guidelines were believed to have been violated but only received responses to 15 of the reports.
One volunteer says he has 9,000 complaints still awaiting responses from December.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/05/youtube-systematically-failing-protect-children-watchdog-claims/
According to Google 90% of the Trusted Flaggers reports are correct. Its not censorship so much as the local pub posting notices saying that racism isn't tolerated and every Saturday selling booze to a group of yoiks goosestepping and cry "Sieg Heil" in the car park.
if someones marching in the carpark crying "Sieg Heil"
It doesnt mean "all hail our glorious leader" or whatever the literal translation is , it means "We are right wing xenophobic thugs with chips on our shoulders who blame everyone else for our failures in life and
hate everyone not like us and are prepared to express that in violence "
"if someones marching in the carpark crying "Sieg Heil"It doesnt mean "all hail our glorious leader" or whatever the literal translation is , it means "We are right wing xenophobic thugs with chips on our shoulders who blame everyone else for our failures in life and hate everyone not like us and are prepared to express that in violence ""
Really? My friend Julian and I do that. Both of us are of German and Jewish parentage. We think it means we are both John Cleese fans and that we like giving the politically correct the shits. Instead "we are right wing xenophobic thugs with chips on our shoulders who blame everyone else for our failures in life and
hate everyone not like us and are prepared to express that in violence". Whoda thunkt?
That's all very well, but scumbags don't think that they're the scumbags, they think everybody else is.
These videos reinforce and validate the poster's actions in the eyes of those they see as peers.
Where once they would boast and threaten in front of their mates and 10 people would agree and egg them on, now they can post Youtube videos that are viewed 300,000 times. That's a hell of an egg on and can only serve to amplify a problem that we should be trying to scale down.
YouTube is a profit first entity (owned by Google).
The made shedloads of money from allowing stolen material to be viewed on their platform. I wouldn't expect them to take any responsibility.
"I want to see these scum bags for the scum bags that they are"
Fine. These scumbags actually like this sh*t. They feed on the scumbaggery. YouTube helps them doing this. This is not a good thing.
Really! Really! Really?
Google makes most of its money from YT by data mining its users, you get far more information from categorising music, film and TV video users then from cat antic videos.
After all other than marketing pet food there is very little extra value you can derive from cat video. Music, film, and TV OTOH indicate lifestyle choices.
Like identifying these people from the video
Like identifying the crimes of these people from the video
Like using the video as evidence to arrest these people
Like using the video as evidence to convict these people
Perhaps showing how they use the video to identify these people, identify their crimes, secure an arrest and conviction, perhaps even in their own video. Instead of whining about videos glamorizing gang violence that they want taken down, how about leaving them up with a counter video showing how the police are doing their fricking job and rounding up and arresting the kind of idiot that makes a Youtube video like that.
Oh, that's right, the above looks like work and a proper job, whereas bitching at YT about the video being up in the first place just involves firing off a couple of emails and a press conference, about how they can't protect the children unless censorship.
No, its not trivial, its their job.
If what is happening in the video isn't a crime then why are they whining about it? If it is a crime then they should be doing their job. My guess is that there is very little glory in doing your job and a whole lot of looking like you're doing something while achieving virtually nothing in pointing fingers at YouTube in press conferences.
If they did their job and then demanded the video was taken down after the miscreants were behind bars, then all well and good, or even better demanded it was taken down and replaced with a re-edited version, perhaps highlighting the characters and their fates.
'Sean Dickwad, seen here making gun gestures at Petey Arsehole, 10 years for dickwaddery',
'Petey Arsehole, here recorded saying he is going to kill Dickwad and his gang, 5 years for aggravated arsehole'
Pour encourager les autres.
Ditto extremist/sexist/racist/homophobic inciting violence blah blah blah video.
'Sean Dickwad, seen here making gun gestures at Petey Arsehole, 10 years for dickwaddery',
'Petey Arsehole, here recorded saying he is going to kill Dickwad and his gang, 5 years for aggravated arsehole'
I'll confess I can't actually be bothered to look these videos up, but I'm assuming that Sean and Petey are not appearing holding up their passports at the photo page...
I'll confess I can't actually be bothered to look these videos up, but I'm assuming that Sean and Petey are not appearing holding up their passports at the photo page...
If the cops have a clue, they'll have a Gangs Unit, and the Gangs Unit will have pix of many/most gang-bangers. Create stills of Sean and Petey from the YouTube video, compare to pix of known gangsters. You won't find all the twits making the vids, but you will find some. Charge 'em if they're actually doing something illegal, prosecute them based on the video evidence, find them guilty and lock them up. If they're not actually doing anything illegal, or if the video evidence isn't enough to charge them or to get a guilty verdict, then what in God's name does anyone expect Google to do? If it's illegal, charge them. If it's not, stand back, the twits will do something illegal soon enough.
Clearly the solution is for politicians to start posting videos to you tube using gang speak and pretend guns with their hands dissing each other. I can only imagine Boris Johnson in a hoody dissing and blarting down Corbyn for his non-dope policies.
That way posting to you tube will instantly become uncool and they will all stop doing it.
Boris Johnson may(or may not) have a hoody but after decimating the London Fire Brigade reducing it by some 3000 people in the name of ' making it more efficient' he is at least partly responsible for the deaths at Grenfell Tower and other fires in London so he shouldn' t be permitted on YouTube either as he sets a bad example.
Regarding the video thugs, what's going on with the fuzz' much vaunted facial recognition?
I think a local beat bobby would have had the little scrotes identified and nailed in a trice, (that is if beat bobbies still existed).
I believe most countries have laws against inciting violence.
If a video doing so is also the means of of doing so, then obviously the video must be taken down.
YouTube are only behaving, as always, as immature profit-first irresponsible ^&%. Their mechanism for filtering contents for children is a joke as well. They just don't care as long as the money rolls in.
Any ordinary person with a grain of common sense can see that these videos are obviously criminally wrong. The Mayor is not trying to impose his personal wishes, he is acting on behalf of millions of ordinary voters.
It is time the myopic "freedom fighters" in the computer industry woke up to their civic responsibilities. If they refuse to do that in the British way they may end up doing it the Peking way.
Mr Part and Parcel comments about this, and yet has remained silent on things such as the increasing acid attack rates?
Anything where he doesn't have to rock the boat. He's not a politician, he's an idiot trying to be like Tony Blair. He'll shout out when he thinks it will impact him positively (arbitrarily banning adverts for promoting attractiveness, for example), but stay silent when people actually expect comment.
"Anything where he doesn't have to rock the boat. He's not a politician, he's an idiot trying to be like Tony Blair."
Anyone saying something political is a "politician". It's not a real job, only reserved for certain self-important people such as BoJo the Clown. Perhaps you are thinking of elected representative? Well, he certainly is one of those. Just not for the Parliament.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
