Why too powerful online media needs to be held accountable to law to a higher degree

I was searching for a way to disable this new uber annoying youtube automatically pausing and i randomly ran into this thread:

https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/youtube/-IhXIVPA9bQ;context-place=forum/youtube

Now, the case is quite simple. Some guy's account got terminated. He tried contacting youtube and they said its terminated because its associated with another previously terminated account. Now, that might be a lie or it might be true, that's not really relevant.

What surprised me here was reflecting about the rules someone stated:

"

Do not create another YouTube account,
to bypass this suspension
..................
Users whose
accounts have been terminated are
Prohibited from Accessing,
Possessing or Creating any other YouTube accounts.
If you have other YouTube accounts, those will be terminated as well.

and

"

Be sure to explain your case carefully, showing why you didn't break any rules.
You can only appeal each community guidelines strike once, so be sure to do it right!

Now i must admit that troubles me, and ironically again if even those rules were not stated properly that is also irrelevant, it is the thought which got in me. Because mistakes always happen, what if the guy was telling the truth in such a case? what then if he was also one who sucked at explaining himself then blew the oppertunity?

Then imagine youtube, google, etc were associated and you could be terminated from the entire thing. Let's start adding facebook to that list, twitter, instagram etc.

What i am getting at, is that mistakes can unjustly shut you out of real aspects of the life that everyone in the west gets to enjoy. I don't really use these, but some people do, and for example if an entire school was using facebook, some kid could be missing out if they could not access.

My point is that the old society is constructed according to principles of law and justice - for example you can go to court to settle something where the idea is to figure out what really is the truth. This is not the case with most things of the new world, these bigger international branches have the power to shut people out of life, outside the law, with no way to appeal. That is a serious problem that society needs to address.

Many of them are luckily not cold-hearted and have good policies, but the reason law is in place is exactly to prevent being dependable on individuals justment calls - they too need to be upheld to the law because their services are integral to the quality of life in the west.

I think youtube channel is no more medium where ideas are gathered, where
artists and entertainers are welcomed unless they are focusing on rainbow elephants. Times of freedom on youtube are gone. Now its pure money making fabric.

They created playground where their rules are applied, like here on forum. If there would be some enforced global law, than we live in utopia and politically left oriented mentality like communism or NSDAP would win.

Don't break the rules.

If you go to a restaurant/hanging out place and start shitting on the floor, don't be surprised you get banned from the establishment.

"

faerwin wrote:

Don't break the rules.

If you go to a restaurant/hanging out place and start shitting on the floor, don't be surprised you get banned from the establishment.

What happens when you don't break the rules and you're banned mistakenly?

Just shit out of luck?

What happens when these oligopolies band together and collectively ban you because you have the wrong political opinion or any opinion that corporations don't like? China happens.

Have fun collecting crumbs off the floor to raise your "social score".

That feeling when you can't get a job, because you don't have a Facebook page, because you've been banned from it for writing a non-PC comment.

"

morbo wrote:

What happens when these oligopolies band together and collectively ban you because you have the wrong political opinion or any opinion that corporations don't like? China happens.

Have fun collecting crumbs off the floor to raise your "social score".

That feeling when you can't get a job, because you don't have a Facebook page, because you've been banned from it for writing a non-PC comment.

This is clearly an undesirable situation, but how do you consider this legally? Should accounts to these websites be considered a fundamental right? Should there be regulations on how accounts can be terminated? Also is this a local or federal issue?

For things like search engines, video hosting sites, blogging sites, etc. you can (relatively) easily prove whether or not the company is abusing monopoly power and they could maybe be broken up with existing laws, in principle. Social media is a different matter entirely and I have zero faith that our current legislature in America can figure out what to do about it, and this is particular issue is largely independent of political party. Both of them are mostly too old and too clueless about technology to handle these kind of issues.

"

Crackmonster wrote:

Then imagine youtube, google, etc were associated and you could be terminated from the entire thing. Let's start adding facebook to that list, twitter, instagram etc.

I think there was an episode of Black Mirror that went a bit like that.

"

morbo wrote:

...
That feeling when you can't get a job, because you don't have a Facebook page, because you've been banned from it for writing a non-PC comment.

Perhaps it should instead be illegal to use someone's completely non-work-related social media accounts as a barometer by which to hire them? The practice of combing through someone's social media with a fine-toothed comb for reasons to avoid hiring them, and treating the absence of such accounts as a reason in and of itself, has to violate laws somewhere. People are no longer allowed to ever be Off The Clock - if you don't act in a 100% professional manner, as if you're actively representing your company at all hours of your life whether you're being paid or not, then you can't secure employment.

That is insane and needs to be dealt with. Personal media accounts are personal and should have no bloody bearing on employment.

"

Shovelcut wrote:

"

faerwin wrote:

Don't break the rules.

If you go to a restaurant/hanging out place and start shitting on the floor, don't be surprised you get banned from the establishment.

What happens when you don't break the rules and you're banned mistakenly?

Just shit out of luck?

And i got to say, even if you did break the rules - there is no point or gain for society to permantly push you out of it. Only for giving enough penalty to make you consider never doing it again - same principle why the highest penalties in prison require the most severe crimes. Shit, I don't think most countries even have a literal life-time sentence. Where would we be if there were no laws to say what penalties for this and that were, if someone somewhere had to decide for their own land oh the penalty is this or that if you do this or that here?

My point is exactly that the whole area is a grey area in the construction of our current societies, modern media was not around when constitutions etc were made, it simply wasn't considered but i hope one day it will become further ingrained because it has become a central part of life now and it's wide open for abuse and miscarriages of justice.

"

1453R wrote:

"

morbo wrote:

...
That feeling when you can't get a job, because you don't have a Facebook page, because you've been banned from it for writing a non-PC comment.

Perhaps it should instead be illegal to use someone's completely non-work-related social media accounts as a barometer by which to hire them? The practice of combing through someone's social media with a fine-toothed comb for reasons to avoid hiring them, and treating the absence of such accounts as a reason in and of itself, has to violate laws somewhere. People are no longer allowed to ever be Off The Clock - if you don't act in a 100% professional manner, as if you're actively representing your company at all hours of your life whether you're being paid or not, then you can't secure employment.

That is insane and needs to be dealt with. Personal media accounts are personal and should have no bloody bearing on employment.

The problem is, you can't really make a law saying that you can't have an opinion on who to hire - that you just have to hire anyone. Following that, it's basically impossible to suss out the difference and if you could it would be based on nazi principles of everyone watching each other plus the system engineered to watch you.

"

1453R wrote:

"

morbo wrote:

...
That feeling when you can't get a job, because you don't have a Facebook page, because you've been banned from it for writing a non-PC comment.

Perhaps it should instead be illegal to use someone's completely non-work-related social media accounts as a barometer by which to hire them? The practice of combing through someone's social media with a fine-toothed comb for reasons to avoid hiring them, and treating the absence of such accounts as a reason in and of itself, has to violate laws somewhere. People are no longer allowed to ever be Off The Clock - if you don't act in a 100% professional manner, as if you're actively representing your company at all hours of your life whether you're being paid or not, then you can't secure employment.

That is insane and needs to be dealt with. Personal media accounts are personal and should have no bloody bearing on employment.

agreed. The problem isn't the social media here but the employer discriminating based on political positions. Now, I'm fine with not hiring people that have extremes views but I don't think that you should be allowed to investigate in the private life of potential employees. Investigate their professional life all you want though.