YouTube has also struggled to remove the shooting videos posted by its users. "Our hearts go out to the families affected by this terrible crime," the Google-owned company said in a statement. "YouTube has clear policies against videos of gratuitous violence and we remove them when they're flagged."Īnd yet, a simple YouTube search of the shooter's name provided dozens of examples of the video, some of which had been online for hours. The site's posted policy says: "It's not okay to post violent or gory content that's primarily intended to be shocking, sensational, or disrespectful." But it also goes on to offer something of a dispensation for such content: "If posting graphic content in a news or documentary context, please be mindful to provide enough information to help people understand what's going on in the video."įacebook is more declarative: "We remove graphic images when they are shared for sadistic pleasure or to celebrate or glorify violence." That also means Facebook has broad leeway to decide what is sadistic or glorifying, and what is not. Reddit's policies on prohibited content are black and white when it comes to spam, so-called revenge porn and impersonations, but graphic violence is not explicitly banned unless it incites others to violence. Gruzd said that better video-and-image analysis might help crackdown on content that platforms wish to ban, but even then the potential for false positives and overpolicing remains high. It's not clear how an algorithm could understand the difference between a killer's attempt to document his crimes and footage from a police body camera that captures a shooting of great public interest, such as the death of Samuel DuBose, shot by a University of Cincinnati police officer in July. "The same feature that can help democracy can hurt moral society." "Citizens might want to have access to a copy of that video, versus to be censored by a certain authority," Mr. Spokespeople for WDBJ have asked other outlets not to use or share the video of their co-workers' deaths, but broadcasts used footage captured on Mr. Ward's camera, including screen captures of the alleged shooter. "Other than the astonishing nature of the video, it adds little information about what happened.
0 kommentar(er)
