Talk:Censorship by Google

message: Full list of youtube-google secret censorship that didnt mentioned at all in their enormous detailed policies. maybe somebody have guts to add it on the page? 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-2OT4G6_eU
Sergey Woropaew (talk) 03:36, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: googling this "147 Words Secretly BANNED on Youtube (Full List)" leads to reddit but reddit has banned the full list too. 194.207.86.26 (talk) 08:20, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Neither YouTube or Reddit are considered reliable sources, so to add this information you will need to find a reliable source. InfiniteNexus (talk) 15:09, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: 147 Words Secretly BANNED on Youtube (Full List)

message: 109.252.201.66 (talk) 10:21, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Please add [[Smart Voting]] censorship

message: On November 10, 2021 the YT announced that it will hide a number of dislikes of videos. I propose to mention this. See also ,  and Official Video AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 08:38, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Are there any sources that specifically call it censorship? Otherwise, I doubt we could, or should, mention it. I'll look more later, but so far I've found this, however the website may not be an RS, according to some of the discussions I have seen about it's use. INDT (talk) 09:28, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that there may be no WP:RS. I won't insist if none is provided by someone. Regards. AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 14:03, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I would not consider that censorship either, unless RS's state otherwise. However, I am shocked that this information isn't on Criticism of YouTube, where it definitely belongs. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:21, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:   Yup. Feel free to move this discussion to the Talk:Criticism of YouTube page if none minds. I also suggest to use tags like  and .--AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 07:02, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

text: Definitely agree about adding this to Criticism of YouTube, almost every source I have seen has either called the move heavily controversial, or directly criticised it. INDT (talk) 07:20, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

text: It's not really a censorship.Cwater1 (talk) 14:45, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dislike button 

message: Google has published terms of service that allow them to take down videos that "spread" misinformation about COVID-19:  . There is plenty of abuse cases to find out I'm sure. It would be hard for a third party to verify fairness of policy application. AXONOV (talk) ⚑ 09:14, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: What is wrong with removing lies that can harm large numbers of people? Would you say it is OK to post that you should take heroin for Covid? This has nothing to do with Google evaluating drugs. The medical researches have done that. WP:NOTAFORUM O3000, Ret. (talk) 10:48, 2 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Is this a page about censorship or the american "liberal" censorship campaign ? 2A01:CB00:118C:7600:C98B:AC57:F341:3904 (talk) 09:42, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  COVID-19 medical misinformation policy 

message: We need add a list of people both conservative and liberal who have been censored on youtube and google since the 2020 election, when they started blocking search results and banning for "mis-information", even when the information proves true -Jf (talk) 17:27, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Any update on this?  Python Drink (talk) 17:50, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  2020-2021 censored and banned list? 

message: "Note that YouTube is a privately owned forum and the freedom of speech does not necessarily apply" - what? That does not make any sense, neither grammatically nor logically. Maybe this was meant to convey that Youtube is not necessarily bound to the First Amendment of the US constitution? Completely different concept. 2A02:8108:2C3F:AC2C:447D:4D16:C09A:101A (talk) 16:43, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Makes no sense