Youtube censorship?

[Benjamin]

Was watching nature clips on Youtube earlier with a friend when we came across this clip (see below) and several others. After watching it my friend said that clips like this should not be allowed on Youtube without an age restriction, yet I replied that it is nature and this is what happens, so it shouldn't be censored.


What are your views on it or other uploads of similar content.

[Contains graphic content]
puqD9YhswuM

[arista]

A warning at the start could help. (for those that need it)
But Yes you are right
its Nature - nothing more.

[Nedusa]

I fear this this thread which asked the question re Internet censorship is degenerating into an "Animal porn" thread as to who can post the most violent clips of animals tearing each other apart.

Suggest the Mods close this thread ASAP

[Benjamin]

Suggestion denied. However those that wish to post in here please don't just post videos without having some rational input, please.

[Benjamin]

Yes I agree I hate it when thoughtless idiots post links like this without any warning...!!!

Well the title of this particular video gives you a clear indication of what it will entail, but some videos I agree have very misleading titles and could do with placing some advisory within the title itself.

[thesheriff443]

Well the title of this particular video gives you a clear indication of what it will entail, but some videos I agree have very misleading titles and could do with placing some advisory within the title itself.

i think you have covered your arse on this:joker:
you will always get people being offended.

i saw a guy putting a screw driver down the end of his nob the other day

[Scarlett.]

I understand there being an age gate, though it is just natural, it could easily be linked to some clip of a kids cartoon, leading to some young kid being shocked.

[Nedusa]

Suggestion denied. However those that wish to post in here please don't just post videos without having some rational input, please.

Fair enough but as you say some warning needs to be placed in the post advising the graphic content of the you tube link.

[Me. I Am Salman]

omg D';

[reece(:]

They should do what iplayer and that does, say this content should be for more mature audiences and click agree or don't watch.

[Marcus.]

I think they do the sign in to see them

[Novo]

Hyenas :worship:

[Nedusa]

I fear this this thread which asked the question re Internet censorship is degenerating into an "Animal porn" thread as to who can post the most violent clips of animals tearing each other apart.

Suggest the Mods close this thread ASAP

Mods - please reconsider your reply to me earlier, as judging by the last few posts these threadsare just getting sicker and sicker. No discussions no debate just post after post with links to animals ripping each other to pieces.

Am I the only one who thinks this is gratuitous violence served up for entertainment .

Close this thread now.....!!!

[thesheriff443]

Mods - please reconsider your reply to me earlier, as judging by the last few posts these threadsare just getting sicker and sicker. No discussions no debate just post after post with links to animals ripping each other to pieces.

Am I the only one who thinks this is gratuitous violence served up for entertainment .

Close this thread now.....!!!

you need more than one complaint about this thread for someone to consider it being closed!
i like ben but if it was not a mod that posted this thread you may have got the answer you wanted.

[thesheriff443]

salman what do you feel when you watch these?

[Munchkins]

Eurgh this thread has degenerated horribly
agree with Nedusa
im an animal lover, and understand its nature, but still finding entertainment out of seeing animals being ripped apart makes me feel ill.
Won't watch a single one of these videos, but even seeing the preview of the video is disgusting
But tbh i dont think youtube needs warnings for its videos, as its made clear, in the titles of videos usually

[Benjamin]

Mods - please reconsider your reply to me earlier, as judging by the last few posts these threadsare just getting sicker and sicker. No discussions no debate just post after post with links to animals ripping each other to pieces.

Am I the only one who thinks this is gratuitous violence served up for entertainment .

Close this thread now.....!!!

This is a serious discussion. If members come in here and abuse the serious discussion they will be/have been dealt with.

[MTVN]

I think if you consciously track down these videos, and then choose to watch a clip with a title of "hyena rips off waterhog's leg", then you should have a pretty good idea of what to expect

[Benjamin]

I think if you consciously track down these videos, and then choose to watch a clip with a title of "hyena rips off waterhog's leg", then you should have a pretty good idea of what to expect

Ahh, see we never intentionally went to watch it. We were watching a clip about a baby warthog who lost his mother and at the end it brings up a selection of vids on the vid screen and we just clicked another thinking it would be more 'suitable' and it was the one in the OP.

[thesheriff443]

I think if you consciously track down these videos, and then choose to watch a clip with a title of "hyena rips off waterhog's leg", then you should have a pretty good idea of what to expect

so do you think its right to put up these video;s in this thread?
after all its a discussion not some where to put up nasty images of animals torn apart.

[MTVN]

Ahh, see we never intentionally went to watch it. We were watching a clip about a baby warthog who lost his mother and at the end it brings up a selection of vids on the vid screen and we just clicked another thinking it would be more 'suitable' and it was the one in the OP.

Hmm ok well I suppose maybe it should depend on how graphic the content is then and have a warning added to the title of some of them, I don't really know what my opinion on this is tbh lol

so do you think its right to put up these video;s in this thread?
after all its a discussion not some where to put uo nasty images of animals torn apart.

Why are you asking me about that, I was just commenting on the question asked in the OP, like Ben said members will be dealt with who don't treat this as a serious discussion

[Novo]

Hmm ok well I suppose maybe it should depend on how graphic the content is then and have a warning added to the title of some of them, I don't really know what my opinion on this is tbh lol



Why are you asking me about that, I was just commenting on the question asked in the OP, like Ben said members will be dealt with who don't treat this as a serious discussion

:idc:

[Marcus.]

I am going to watch it dont like stuff like that

[Kazanne]

I haven't watched it,I can't but I agree that maybe the actual videos shouldn't be posted as some will be tempted to watch it,maybe just a link to the vidoes would be better as then people can actually go to it to watch,personally I don't see the fascination with watching anything getting hurt or killed nature or not.

[MTVN]

:idc:

No reason why I can't inject a spot of humour to my serious post

[Benjamin]

I haven't watched it,I can't but I agree that maybe the actual videos shouldn't be posted as some will be tempted to watch it,maybe just a link to the vidoes would be better as then people can actually go to it to watch,personally I don't see the fascination with watching anything getting hurt or killed nature or not.

Thing is though, this video (and others like it) are freely available to watch on YT with no restrictions and it can be quite easily viewed as it is in this thread. Since starting this thread my stance has altered, I do think YT should place a warning onto things like this (like the iPlayer suggestion), I still don't have a problem with videos like this as it's what happens in nature and can be quite interesting.

[Munchkins]

I understand how some people can find some of the videos interesting
but for example the one of the pregnant wildebeest having its fetus ripped out, how can people find that vaguely interesting its just sickening
i would just put a disclaimer at the beginning of the video that you have to click off to resume watching it..

[Kazanne]

Thing is though, this video (and others like it) are freely available to watch on YT with no restrictions and it can be quite easily viewed as it is in this thread. Since starting this thread my stance has altered, I do think YT should place a warning onto things like this (like the iPlayer suggestion), I still don't have a problem with videos like this as it's what happens in nature and can be quite interesting.

I understand what you mean Uk,YouTube should get their act together regarding things like this,I agree there should be some sort of warning,I love watching wildlife programs but as soon as a 'kill' is coming up i have to turn over:hugesmile:

[Marc]

These videos :bawling:

[Roy Mars III]

I understand how some people can find some of the videos interesting
but for example the one of the pregnant wildebeest having its fetus ripped out, how can people find that vaguely interesting its just sickening
i would just put a disclaimer at the beginning of the video that you have to click off to resume watching it..

Agreed.

[billy123]

People are such wetends at times i dont want to watch it so i havent that doesnt mean nobody should be able to watch it we should all have the choice.
Just because someone doesnt want to see it doesnt give them the right to force that choice upon everybody else thats just ridiculous reasoning.

[LemonJam]

Am I the only person completely unaffected by that video?

Yeah I agree with the whole disclaimer/warning beforehand shiz.

[Nedusa]

Thing is though, this video (and others like it) are freely available to watch on YT with no restrictions and it can be quite easily viewed as it is in this thread. Since starting this thread my stance has altered, I do think YT should place a warning onto things like this (like the iPlayer suggestion), I still don't have a problem with videos like this as it's what happens in nature and can be quite interesting.

I'm sorry but I have to strongly disagree , there is nothing nothing remotely interesting in watching a pregnant wildebeest having its foetus and its leg ripped of and eaten by Hyenas . This happens in nature but it is still stomach churning and I for one do not want to see this. These clips should have a warning of graphic content.

Also I fail to understand how a thread purporting to discuss censorship can degenerate into clip after clip of wild animals ripping each other to shreds and feeding on the carcasses of the weakest.

Folks .... Please get a grip...!!!

[Shaun]

Also I fail to understand how a thread purporting to discuss censorship can degenerate into clip after clip of wild animals ripping each other to shreds and feeding on the carcasses of the weakest.

Folks .... Please get a grip...!!!

There's...one video in this thread? In the OP? In a spoiler? Not quite sure we're the ones who need to get a grip.

[Novo]

Also i fail to understand how a Hyena hunting a wildebeest like the way those 2 Hyenas did isn't remotely interesting.. that's a once in a lifetime clip, i don't really have much sympathy for it.. wrong place wrong time = Hyena Fodder

[Benjamin]

I'm sorry but I have to strongly disagree , there is nothing nothing remotely interesting in watching a pregnant wildebeest having its foetus and its leg ripped of and eaten by Hyenas . This happens in nature but it is still stomach churning and I for one do not want to see this. These clips should have a warning of graphic content.

Also I fail to understand how a thread purporting to discuss censorship can degenerate into clip after clip of wild animals ripping each other to shreds and feeding on the carcasses of the weakest.

Folks .... Please get a grip...!!!

Well you may not find it interesting, but I and many others do find nature interesting. This thread is not video after video of wild animals ripping each other to shreds, they have been removed, I even told you that.

And if you do not want to see these types of videos, then do not watch them, it really is as simple as that. Nobody forced you to watch it in the first place, that was your own choice to hit the play button. The video I posted was also spoilered after I initially posted it.

[thesheriff443]

There's...one video in this thread? In the OP? In a spoiler? Not quite sure we're the ones who need to get a grip.

if you had been here sooner!,you would have seen a kill fest of you tube clips its only beacuse ben pulled his finger out and removed the rest and put his own in in a spoiler.

[thesheriff443]

Well you may not find it interesting, but I and many others do find nature interesting. This thread is not video after video of wild animals ripping each other to shreds, they have been removed, I even told you that.

And if you do not want to see these types of videos, then do not watch them, it really is as simple as that. Nobody forced you to watch it in the first place, that was your own choice to hit the play button. The video I posted was also spoilered after I initially posted it.

i get what your saying but by not puting your clip in a spoiler in the first place it was like turning up to a house fire the next day:joker:

[Nedusa]

So where is the debate on You Tube censorship , what types of YT clips are posted what are removed , how much political or religious hate speech is permitted. Is slander allowed or removed? Who decides, to what degree . Who sets these ground rules and what body or group has the final say on what stays on YT.

This was the type of debate I was expecting not just one clip after another of the type we have seen in this thread. The thread has in my opinion gone off on a tangent from the title in the OP.

[Benjamin]

Even without the spoiler, you could tell from the video title and from the post I made that it wasn't going to be a nice, happy little video, it was very obvious. The still from the video does not show anything graphic, so if people then played the video and found it graphic and it offended them, no offence, but they really do need to get a little common sense. It's like having a cup of coffee with 'hot' written on the lid yet someone still drinking it, burning themselves and complaining that they didn't realise it was going to be hot.

[Benjamin]

So where is the debate on You Tube censorship , what types of YT clips are posted what are removed , how much political or religious hate speech is permitted. Is slander allowed or removed? Who decides, to what degree . Who sets these ground rules and what body or group has the final say on what stays on YT.

This was the type of debate I was expecting not just one clip after another of the type we have seen in this thread. The thread has in my opinion gone off on a tangent from the title in the OP.

It is not video after video, they were removed when I came back online and no more have been posted since. You are the one continuing to go on about it, nobody else.

So continue the discussion and stop calling on things that were removed.

[thesheriff443]

back to censorship!
is it right then for you or other members to post clips on this forum for younger members to see that they would not be able to see on other sites due to age restrictions?

[Benjamin]

back to censorship!
is it right then for you or other members to post clips on this forum for younger members to see that they would not be able to see on other sites due to age restrictions?

Nope, but those videos, mine included, had no age restrictions.

[Munchkins]

There's...one video in this thread? In the OP? In a spoiler? Not quite sure we're the ones who need to get a grip.

Maybe if you had been here earlier you would have seen the 4/5 other clips that were posted including one of a fetus being ripped out of a wildebeest

40D and other iplayers (i think) have the correct way, putting disclaimers saying the clip is suitable for ages over, and you have to click a box to say you are that age
Yes people will lie but they are choosing to watch the video even after a disclaimer so their fault

[Benjamin]

Maybe if you had been here earlier you would have seen the 4/5 other clips that were posted including one of a fetus being ripped out of a wildebeest

40D and other iplayers (i think) have the correct way, putting disclaimers saying the clip is suitable for ages over, and you have to click a box to say you are that age
Yes people will lie but they are choosing to watch the video even after a disclaimer so their fault

I agree with that, and yes, if they choose to watch it even with the disclaimer it is their own choice.

[MTVN]

It's a bit more difficult to regulate it with Youtube though, 4od/iplayer etc have complete control over what's uploaded but with YouTube you've obviously got thousands of people uploading videos every minute, it's not always gonna be possible to ensure every video that might be a bit graphic has a disclaimer

[Vicky.]

It's a bit more difficult to regulate it with Youtube though, 4od/iplayer etc have complete control over what's uploaded but with YouTube you've obviously got thousands of people uploading videos every minute, it's not always gonna be possible to ensure every video that might be a bit graphic has a disclaimer

Yes, I will never forget that video that stayed up for ages of that guy who jumped off a cliff or something and split his face wide open but was still alive D:

It might even still be there. It was my own fault for watching it though as I knew beforehand what it was just didnt expect it to be so graphic. I dont remember if that had a disclaimer.

I think overly vicious animal vids should have a disclaimer. But its a bit hard to figure when to draw the line. For example a vid of a snake eating a mouse, I dont think thats bad, but other people will. But yes, the wildebeast one posted in here yesterday was bad and should have had one (again my own fault, looked at it after I knew what it was AND it had been deleted :laugh: )

I do think youtube could add censors though, from what I remember you have to wait about an hour or so for your video to become public after you upload it? I thought they were checking that the content was suitable during that time?

[Munchkins]

It's a bit more difficult to regulate it with Youtube though, 4od/iplayer etc have complete control over what's uploaded but with YouTube you've obviously got thousands of people uploading videos every minute, it's not always gonna be possible to ensure every video that might be a bit graphic has a disclaimer

Before a video is uploaded the user has to set an age rating?
if the do not follow these guidlines/lie about the rating they could be banned from youtube idk

[Livia]

I'm sorry but I have to strongly disagree , there is nothing nothing remotely interesting in watching a pregnant wildebeest having its foetus and its leg ripped of and eaten by Hyenas . This happens in nature but it is still stomach churning and I for one do not want to see this. These clips should have a warning of graphic content.

Also I fail to understand how a thread purporting to discuss censorship can degenerate into clip after clip of wild animals ripping each other to shreds and feeding on the carcasses of the weakest.

Folks .... Please get a grip...!!!

I agree that this kind of stuff is sickening to watch. I wonder at the kind of people who choose to watch it. I agree that there is naturally some interest in stuff like this, but surely the interest is confined to people in the field of zoology, or other related field. Yes, it's nature and it happens, but then so does rape, female genital mutilation and other things that I do not want to watch on the Internet. Just because some sicko posts it up doesn't mean it should be available to the general public and if you really enjoy watching stuff like this, then I worry for your mental health.

Incidentally, words can paint a picture, and I didn't actually have to watch the film to get a sickening graphic description of it from several different posters.

[Benjamin]

I wouldn't say I enjoy watching stuff like this, but it does interest me a lot. Nature and the animal kingdom always has, and unfortunately it doesn't all come with a happy ending. The one that somebody posted with the fetus was too much (hence it being deleted). But comparing watching animals killing each other (to eat, survive and feed their offspring) to rape is ridiculous.

If , say, some of these videos were instead in a BBC/Nature documentary, like I'm sure some have been, would the same be said of them then?

[Livia]

I wouldn't say I enjoy watching stuff like this, but it does interest me a lot. Nature and the animal kingdom always has, and unfortunately it doesn't all come with a happy ending. The one that somebody posted with the fetus was too much (hence it being deleted). But comparing animals killing each other (to eat, survive and feed their offspring) to rape is ridiculous.

I'm sure that not everyone who watches this stuff does so for anything other reason than the gratuitous, twisted thrill of watching something tear something else apart. Rape happens... we're animals... I don't see the difference really. You see, I'm wondering where we draw the line when it comes to watching stuff online. I mean, wolverines kill for fun, I'm sure I could find some footage of them doing something dispicable to another animal for reasons other than survival... so should that be available for random members of the public with a computer, or not?

[Livia]

...............If , say, some of these videos were instead in a BBC/Nature documentary, like I'm sure some have been, would the same be said of them then?

I'd like to think that the BBC has some responsibility, and that the stuff they show is relevant and in context, and not just pain and suffering so some people can get their thrill on.

[Z]

I've not watched the video. I also thought that YouTube previewed all video clips before they were publicly available? At least, I'm pretty sure they used to, because there was such a time delay after you'd uploaded one before it became public...

I think that nature videos of a graphic nature are still important to watch. Part of the appeal of watching shark documentaries is seeing their predatory instincts kick in. That's just one example but there are lots of other animals that hold the same appeal. I would have thought that plenty of science based professions have a vested interest in this kind of video - in terms of observation and understanding of animal behaviour. Having read the posts about this video, it's not one that I want to watch, but I do occasionally watch wildlife videos that contain violent fights. There's that one of the crocodile, bison and lion that has millions of views on YouTube that I find really interesting, for example.

[Benjamin]

I'm sure that not everyone who watches this stuff does so for anything other reason than the gratuitous, twisted thrill of watching something tear something else apart. Rape happens... we're animals... I don't see the difference really. You see, I'm sondering where we draw the line when it comes to watching stuff online. I mean, wolverines kill for fun, I'm sure I could find some footage of them doing something dispicable to another animal for reasons other than survival... so should that be available for random members of the public with a computer, or not?

I see your point, but I class humans very separately from animals. But to your point about animals killing each other just for the fun, what about when TV documentaries show those clips? Would you classify that as the same, where millions of viewers in one hit are shown it, or is that different from online? I don't get a kick out seeing animals in pain, I have so much respect and fascination with the lives they lead, and yes some people probably do watch this for the fun (I don't disagree with you that is a little distrurbing) but still comparing it to rape just doesn't work for me.

[Benjamin]

I've not watched the video. I also thought that YouTube previewed all video clips before they were publicly available? At least, I'm pretty sure they used to, because there was such a time delay after you'd uploaded one before it became public...
.



I always thought that too. But then again with a years worth of footage being uploaded onto Youtube everyday, it's very hard to monitor I suppose.

[Livia]

I see your point, but I class humans very separately from animals. But to your point about animals killing each other just for the fun, what about when TV documentaries show those clips? Would you classify that as the same, where millions of viewers in one hit are shown it, or is that different from online? I don't get a kick out seeing animals in pain, I have so much respect and fascination with the lives they lead, and yes some people probably do watch this for the fun (I don't disagree with you that is a little distrurbing) but still comparing it to rape just doesn't work for me.

I wasn't implying that you personally get a kick out of it, but I think there are a lot of people who do or this stuff wouldn't be so widely viewed. And yes, Humans are very different to animals. Animals generally don't harm each other for kicks, rape, murder, abuse, ******* each other over for a percentage... I've never known an animal fire a gun or build a bomb, but I realise I'm going off at a tangent there. By comparing it to rape, I was trying to make the point that there is some stuff that is just too disturbing to watch.

I think the difference between watching this stuff on TV as part of a documentary, and watching it online is context. On Youtube I can view just the cruelty, the pain, the terror... on TV I watch it as part of a bigger picture.

[MTVN]

Yes, I will never forget that video that stayed up for ages of that guy who jumped off a cliff or something and split his face wide open but was still alive D:

It might even still be there. It was my own fault for watching it though as I knew beforehand what it was just didnt expect it to be so graphic. I dont remember if that had a disclaimer.

I think overly vicious animal vids should have a disclaimer. But its a bit hard to figure when to draw the line. For example a vid of a snake eating a mouse, I dont think thats bad, but other people will. But yes, the wildebeast one posted in here yesterday was bad and should have had one (again my own fault, looked at it after I knew what it was AND it had been deleted :laugh: )

I do think youtube could add censors though, from what I remember you have to wait about an hour or so for your video to become public after you upload it? I thought they were checking that the content was suitable during that time?

Oh God I saw that video too, I remember hearing about it and the curiosity got the better off me, made me a lot more cautious of those sort of videos since

Before a video is uploaded the user has to set an age rating?
if the do not follow these guidlines/lie about the rating they could be banned from youtube idk

Yeah I suppose they could do that, I think users can choose to set their videos so that you have to sign in and confirm you're over 18 to see them but then you just have to trust they'll do it, I bet a lot don't because they think they'll miss out on views and stuff

And also like Vicky said it's hard to know really where to draw the line, I guess it can be pretty subjective about how much is too much

[Nedusa]

I wasn't implying that you personally get a kick out of it, but I think there are a lot of people who do or this stuff wouldn't be so widely viewed. And yes, Humans are very different to animals. Animals generally don't harm each other for kicks, rape, murder, abuse, ******* each other over for a percentage... I've never known an animal fire a gun or build a bomb, but I realise I'm going off at a tangent there. By comparing it to rape, I was trying to make the point that there is some stuff that is just too disturbing to watch.

I think the difference between watching this stuff on TV as part of a documentary, and watching it online is context. On Youtube I can view just the cruelty, the pain, the terror... on TV I watch it as part of a bigger picture.

Yes , this is a good point ,clips of animal violence on other animals happens everyday it's part of life , we eat animals so we have to kill them as we'll ( albeit humanely in an abbatoir). The distressing scenes in some of the earlier posts in this thread showed just the violence and so this was taken out of context with a longer more detailed programme. So to watch only the violence part suggests this is actually what the YT viewer is seeking.

I think this is where YT reaches it limitations as it shows short video clips of just about anything so it's hard to appreciate the wider context. Bottom line , most normal people do not want to watch these short clips showing just the blood and gore, but I guess there are people out there who do get off on this sort of thing...!!!

[Livia]

Yes , this is a good point ,clips of animal violence on other animals happens everyday it's part of life , we eat animals so we have to kill them as we'll ( albeit humanely in an abbatoir). The distressing scenes in some of the earlier posts in this thread showed just the violence and so this was taken out of context with a longer more detailed programme. So to watch only the violence part suggests this is actually what the YT viewer is seeking.

I think this is where YT reaches it limitations as it shows short video clips of just about anything so it's hard to appreciate the wider context. Bottom line , most normal people do not want to watch these short clips showing just the blood and gore, but I guess there are people out there who do get off on this sort of thing...!!!

I agree.

I've said this before but I'm going to labour the point... The Internet is like the Wild West: new, in its infancy and lawless. People are suddenly demanding freedoms that just didn't exist even ten years ago. How many parents have no idea what their children (I'm including everyone under the age of majority while their parents are still responsible for their moral wellbeing) are looking at. Every perversion you can think of is catered for on the Internet. There is virtually nothing you can't watch, and if anyone suggests some stuff should be blocked, you're immediately met with an argument about freedom of speech and access of information. We are not "entitled" to watch what we like. You can't go to a cockfight in this country, but you could watch one on the Internet. You can't watch bear-baiting in this country - but you can watch it on the Internet. People are struggling against censorship, but in many cases, censorship is there for a reason.

[lostalex]

There should be no censorpship when it comes to nature video's.

I was talking to my friend about this the other day, about how rape is so common in the animal world, and how zoo's even encourage rape by trying to put a horny male in a small space with a female HOPING that the male will rape the female.

This is the animal kingdom, it's not pretty. But rape and murder is natural. In fact most animal rights group even encourage rape.

[Livia]

There should be no censorpship when it comes to nature video's.

I was talking to my friend about this the other day, about how rape is so common in the animal world, and how zoo's even encourage rape by trying to put a horny male in a small space with a female HOPING that the male will rape the female.

This is the animal kingdom, it's not pretty. But rape and murder is natural. In fact most animal rights group even encourage rape.

There should be no censorship when it comes to nature videos. But in the same way, you should not be able to view just the cruel, terrifying, brutal bits out of context with the rest of the video. To want to view just the harrowing stuff seems pretty abnormal to me.