Posted here with a slightly different URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19230245 .

I was scrolling through amazon video rental last night and I was surprised to see an anti-vax documentary in their “highest rated” section. When I clicked “more movies like this”, there were dozens of similar documentaries that came up.

I've seen this too. I wonder if this is a related problem of "people who bother to write product reviews are much more likely to be the ones with problems."

E.g. "Nearly the only people who watch and rate dead serious conspiracy theory documentaries are those looking to confirm their beliefs."

I would say someone should organize people to mass one star these dangerous things, but Amazon should really have the sense to not buy the rights in the first place.

Wait, you mean they just barely demonetized them? As in, they've been paying them for clicks this entire time, even after all of the measles outbreaks the last few months?

Crazy... to think YouTube execs had no clue that there is a direct correlation to the media they help propagate and the outbreak of previously cured diseases!

> there is a direct correlation to the media they help propagate and the outbreak

interesting, has someone studied that?

Not hard to understand when the other discussion HN had about this today was all worrying about censorship.

(Standard disclaimer: nowhere near that stuff, my views are unrelated and uninformed, etc)

> After advertisers complained about programmatic ad placements on anti-vax videos, YouTube removed ads on videos that advocate against vaccination.

uhmm, OK so it's "only" demonetization, but it's driven by Big Business.

How long before Big Business decides who is allowed the right of Free Speech and who is not?

Just sayin...

Free speech doesn't mean someone has to host your speech.

If someone has 99% of the market and there is no publicly available (i.e. to anyone) competing service, it effectively turns into free speech limitation (not legally, just effectively).

When you say market in this hypothetical, what are you referring to? Video? Cable? Newspaper? Radio? Internet? Print? All of the above?

Movie Theaters effectively have their markets cornered, should they be forced to host your speech even if they don't want to?

I'm not sure what you mean by market.

Let's say people watched 99% of video on youtube. I guess that's inconvenient if you can't do your thing on youtube, but that's not a lack of free speech, it is a lack of attention.

Free speech doesn't guarantee that if I go shout on a street corner I'll get as much attention as youtube or any other street corner. It has always been that way.

Of course it does, somebody whether it is a nation or a website or a piece of paper has to host your speech. Otherwise it will just be thoughts inside your brain.

No, it doesn't. You are not entitled to a platform. You are entitled to safety from the government when you say objectionable things (under most conditions).

A newspaper doesn't have to publish your op-ed. YouTube doesn't have to host your video. You can make a website for free to get your point across without going through Youtube, so they're not silencing you either. Not in a free speech sense.

Nonsense, you're entirely free to express the speech in your head however you deem fit.

You're just not entitled to forcing others to express your speech for you.

Oh get a grip, Big Business loves to be advertised everywhere, just on these dumbfuck channels that are an insult to intelligence

Are you saying "Big Business" should be forced to advertise on anti-vax videos against their wishes?

Saying “how long before X?” is just the slippery slope fallacy. “Freedom of Speech” (at least in the US) means the government can’t take away your right to say something. As far as I know, people can still claim vaccines cause autism. They can even still do it on Youtube, apparently. They just can’t make money doing it, at least on that one (non-governmental) platform.