Response to 'HOPE not hate' report on BitChute
On Friday the 17th July we were contacted by a journalist who made us aware of an upcoming report by the activist organization 'HOPE not hate'. The journalist was under embargo by 'HOPE not hate' and unauthorized to share the report with us. Therefore, we reached out directly to 'HOPE not hate' requesting a copy of the report, and more specifically the list of terrorist content they had found, so that we can take the appropriate measures to enforce our guidelines.
In the time since, several other journalists have contacted us citing the same report and we have given them the following statement, excerpts of which were quoted in the article by The Independent:
"BitChute is a startup that's growing incredibly fast in a market that has been monopolized by YouTube. There are millions of videos on BitChute and thousands of videos are uploaded daily. We have removed thousands that violate our terms of use, but we are improving our moderation systems and we know we need to do more. We are working hard to introduce new policies and processes which will further improve our ability to remove illegal content and we are already engaging with a number of organizations to scale up our capabilities. As a small platform, we have limited resources and encourage organizations like Hope Not Hate to help us improve our processes and enter into a direct dialogue with us. Studies have shown that banning people from online platforms pushes them on to other networks based in remote jurisdictions where there is no accountability, no oversight, and no possibility for improvement and where people may be propagandized by groups that do have extreme agendas. No one should want that, we do not want that and BitChute can play a major role in preventing that from happening."
Yesterday the report was released by 'HOPE not hate' and its contents were damning, although the conclusions of the report are far from the truth of the situation. BitChute is and always has been a neutral platform. We are committed to eliminating terrorist and violent extremist content from our services.
We have already been taking steps to address the gap between the intent of our guidelines and our ability to enforce them. This began with establishing a dedicated moderation team at the start of the year, which we plan to grow, and is continuing with work on refining our guidelines to improve clarity, coverage and alignment with public expectations. We are also looking to make significant improvements to the technological aspects with a redesign of our moderation system to improve its capability, efficiency and transparency. And we have been seeking outside assistance with gaining access to automated detection technogies, like those deployed by our much larger competitors.
Since we launched three years ago we have made many thousands of social media posts covering a diverse array of topics and opinions from a wide range of users, we never thought of these as endorsements of either the creators, their content or their views and were intended to stimulate debate. Moving forward we have decided to make changes to how we utilise social media, for now usage will be limited to posting company announcements and we will conduct an internal review to identify any others that are an appropriate use of our influence.
https://support.bitchute.com/announcements/response-to-hope-not-hate-report-on-bitchute
Wasiu ago
It's what is called "controlled opposition".........we thought that (with creation of Bitchute) we're gonna have alternative to YT, but, after getting some recognition, turns out it's same shit only repackaged differently.
They will be "competing vigorously" with YT "on all fronts" but in the afternoon, you'll find them shaking hands and sharing cigars in the same club as YT and other Soroses of this world with convoluted connections ending either with "Vanguard", "Blackrock", "Fidelity" or "Street State" financial institutions.
SearchVoatBot ago
This submission was linked from this anonymous v/QRV comment.
Posted automatically (#130195) by the SearchVoat.co Cross-Link Bot. You can suppress these notifications by appending a forward-slash(/) to your Voat link. More information here. (@AlwaysBWhitePositive: Click here to suppress your anonymous crosslink notifications)
Rellik88 ago
@Bitchute So?
MadWorld ago
Wiki:
HOPE not hate mission statement:
A far left organization targets the far right.
truf_tales ago
their logo C = AO aka pyramid and the eye
or pyramid and the sun
Marzh ago
Seems these "organizations" always make the first step.
With the same old tactics, that always seem to work.
They even got companies to openly support domestic terrorist organizations.
If this goes on, the future will be bleak...
tankingwrong ago
Lbry.tv could very well make the same call to block your content from being seen on their site, but it's still part of the blockchain they pull metadata from which in turn pulls the actual videos from those redundantly hosting (if I'm understanding how it works correctly).
So you would host your own lbry instance if you wanted your content to be visible, or anyone else running an instance without any concern for filtering the content pulled from the blockchain would show your stuff as well.
We had a similar thing, but without the blockchain on GNU Social and Mastodon. GNU Social instances like Quitter didn't like Right content, so instances like shitposter.club, sealion.club, smuglo.li and others were made that didn't care what people posted. However, Mastodon would pull the same protocol that these others would publish, so while you could look on each of the sites and find usernames identified by server (so "[email protected] was a different person from [email protected], for example), Mastodon wasn't interested in seeing any of those server's contents whatsoever, using a "fruits from the poisoned tree" argument to block all those other servers altogether. So people on Mastodon would not know that [email protected] even existed, but people on smuglo.li were quite aware of the posts from [email protected].
The solution has always been "roll your own". But with government interference in ICANN, having people remember or find your site had its own set of hurdles if you got shoah'd like DailyStormer, but that may be less of an issue as more people move away to create blockchain driven domain systems (Unstoppable Domains, Namecoin, Open NIC) where people will not be dependent on a DNS server that can be altered but instead pull info from a blockchain.
noob_tube ago
the lbry backend is still accessible, you could build your own frontend for it. Come to think of it, isn't bitchute as well?
The_Duke_of_Dabs ago
I dont know shit about IT but you sound like you do. You, uh, should totally make a Goat version of YouTube/Bitchute. . . . YouGoatChute or BitGoatTube
noob_tube ago
Well the problem isn't building it in the first place, its avoiding being destroyed by bots or child porn or the FBI or all the other jewish attack vectors.
romanstock ago
Once govts properly get their 'hate speech' laws in it's all over anyways, they'll arrest and brutally fine anyone who hosts content that promotes 'hate'.
Maker_Wolf ago
That will be the day that freedom of speech truly dies.