YouTube Won’t Distinguish Between Misinformation and Reporting, So It Suspended My Channel

YouTube declared on December 9th 2020 that it was taking down video clips which alleged widespread fraud in voting during the 2020 presidential election. YouTube developed its anti-election misinformation policies a month after Trump’s lying about his loss enraged a mob attacking the U.S. Capitol.

However, casual viewers might not be aware of the extent to which this policy reaches. YouTube does not punish misinformation-spreading channels. In many cases it even punishes those channels. Report on spreading misinformation. It does not distinguish between content creators and speakers. If a channel produces a straight-news video that merely shows Trump making an unfounded election-related claim—perhaps during a speech, in an interview, or at a rally—YouTube would punish the channel as if the channel had made the claim, even if no one affiliated with the channel endorsed Trump’s lies.

After YouTube was suspended, I witnessed this for the first time. my show—Rising—For violating election misinformation policy, even though neither I nor my co-hosts had ever said anything that would indicate that the election was rigged.

I will explain. Reason, Additionally, I am a worker for The Hill As a co-host Rising, The news site’s morning program, which is available on YouTube. Ryan Grim, my co-host, is on YouTube. The Intercept Kim Iversen is an independent commentator.

Yesterday night we discovered that YouTube has been suspended The HillThe entire account of’s for seven days was blocked, which prevented us from publishing any new videos. Election misinformation was the reason, resulting from two videos. This is the first of two videos that was not broadcast as part Steady RisingRaw footage of Trump speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference (February 26), during which he falsely claimed that the election was over.

Ingraham of Fox News interviewed Trump in the second clip. Ingraham said that Trump’s invasion of Ukraine was happening only due to a fraudulent election. Following that clip, Grim and I both criticized Trump in general—my co-host even called the former president a mad man—but neither of us Clearly Corrected the claim of a “rigged electoral”

There is no one that has not watched. Steady RisingYou can read my works at Reason, You can also read Grim’s work here The InterceptBoth of them could come away feeling that the 2020 election was rigged. Both on TV and in publications, we have criticised this false claim.

YouTube claims that YouTube’s videos are merely for entertainment purposes. AcknowledgementFalse claims are not to be taken seriously unless the statement is corrected or disproven elsewhere. It is sufficient to include a warning label within the description of the video that false claims about election have been made. YouTube seems to be moving towards trigger warnings.

It effectively bans YouTube straight-news reporting. Say a news channel creates a video that merely intends to provide viewers with footage of a Trump speech or interview—minus any additional commentary—where he makes claims about the election. YouTube says that a video of this nature is in breach its misinformation policy, if it does not correct or call out the claim.

YouTube has the right to ban individuals who make false claims. YouTube cannot ban individuals from informing their viewers of the fact that the ex-president is still making false claims. The policy does not make any distinction. It simply treats all reports equally More misinformation as misinformation itself unless clearly labeled—even in a video where no commentary is being offered at all.

A policy like this could jeopardize content creators who are working to correct misinformation. A news clip that simply noted, “former president Trump continued to question the legitimacy and 2020 election in his recent address, and stated the following,” could be flagged as not adequately refuting these false claims. Imagine reporting on live events.

YouTube is quite surprising to put themselves in the situation of being vets. All content Channels that promote election-related misinformation can include content from channels that do not explicitly endorse such claims. However, these channels may occasionally mention the fact Trump is making these claims. These channels are certainly not doing their customers any favors. Steady RisingViewers are acutely aware that Trump claims he was cheated.

YouTube, a private corporation, can design any policies that it likes. A video channel is not owed to anyone. However, I doubt that most people know how to make a video channel. vast The misinformation policy is now. The platform will punish content creators that make false statements about election results. YouTube could punish news stations for reporting on the news.