this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2025
1158 points (98.9% liked)

Microblog Memes

9668 readers
804 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 188 points 2 weeks ago

There is no safety on corporate media. This is why we built the fediverse.

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 63 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

No community guidelines violated

soldiers shooting civilians, including children

I mean, it's right there. YouTube ain't LiveLeak.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 76 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Coverage of the Tienanmen Square Massacre is on YouTube and includes exactly this.

Hell, it's practically a meme to shout "Nobody in China knows about Tienanmen Square!" at the villainous Lemmy Tankies, precisely because the Chinese government has a policy of taking down media coverage while the US media proudly reproduces it at every opportunity.

Why would YouTube, a company that has repeatedly expressed its commitment to breaking down the barriers of government censorship and oppression, suddenly decide it needs to censor a state-sanctioned massacre of civilians? What would lead us to conclude that the genocide in Gaza should be treated differently than the Tienanmen Square massacre?

[–] GlitchyDigiBun@lemmy.world 15 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I wonder if we could pressure the BBC or PBS into pushing these videos to force Google/Israel to do this even more blatantly.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 12 points 2 weeks ago

Not under the current Zionist administrations

[–] 87Six@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

repeatedly expressed its commitment to breaking down the barriers of government censorship

That was only and will only ever be done when it's in favor of whatever government reigns over the company.

Displaying the Tiananmen Square Massacre is in line with the USA gov. Displaying Israeli crimes is not.

Don't be naive. Youtube and Google don't give half a shit to go against censorship.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago

Don’t be naive.

Hardly naive. Just pointing out the obvious.

YouTube clearly has no problem hosting snuff films with the correct political valence.

[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 weeks ago

the post says coverage of. was actual video of the acts shown?

[–] DakRalter@thelemmy.club 7 points 2 weeks ago

YouTube has no problem with multiple different ai generated gory videos of Rebecca Madeupname being mauled alive by an orca. Every time I opened a private window, one of these was recommended. No age restriction, nothing.

They have no problem with porn bots spamming family friendly channels with pro-paedo comments, even though they use the same avatars and messages so should be easy to filter out. Videos promoting dangerous hacks stay up even after multiple reports. They're fine monetising reaction channels that are nothing more than freebooting other people's work.

So YouTube's tos really comes down to: it's fine if it makes money.

I wish there was proper competition, even if it was run by another awful company like Microsoft or amazon. AFAIK no other platform offers monetisation like yt does, so people stay and put up with their crap.

(Personally I'm hoping to reupload mf stuff to peertube if I ever come out this slump.)

[–] sk1nnym1ke@piefed.social 58 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Can someone let that reporter know that PeerTube and other YouTube alternatives already exist.

Yes there are less viewers comparing to YouTube but at least the content willl be not removed.

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 24 points 2 weeks ago

Content like that should definitely go on multiple platforms. Ironically the right is much better at this, cause they are used to getting deplatformed.

[–] dil@lemmy.zip 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

they could even host it themselves on their own hardware ensuring it stays up

[–] ieGod@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 weeks ago

This really isn't a viable long term solution for most individuals.

[–] 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com 43 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

If you've been on the internet for a decade or two and can't find news you clearly remember that happened about the big corp, tech or the government, you know these ghouls work together to shape a narrative. They scrub the internet clean of it.

These companies (big tech and news corps) being a monopolies isn't a coincidence, authoritarian governments like it when they have direct access to narrative control.

Needless to say, archive everything you think could disappear, in multiple places, and possibly in regions of their geopolitical rivals.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Sometimes it might be getting scrubbed. Sometimes it just gets buried under other bullshit. I've had to run the same few keywords in different combos to eventually find the article I was looking for because so many other things with the same keywords happened since. The real thing that hampers this is how Google/youtube removed search by year ranges.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 27 points 2 weeks ago

google is waaaaaaaaay beyond "don't be evil". Right now, for them any kind of statement is just a temporary transportation between their position and more tech monopoly.

[–] Fleur_@aussie.zone 25 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

We really live in a world where "YouTube took down my warcrime videos" is bigger news than "there are warcrimes being committed"

[–] morphballganon@lemmynsfw.com 25 points 2 weeks ago

It's not bigger news. But it's important supplemental news to know that large corporations are complicit in the war crimes.

[–] DandomRude@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago

This is why the world is so terrible: centralization of capital and thus also attention in the hands of unscrupulous monsters.

In Western countries, we may convince ourselves that we are better than the neglected Third World countries because of all our technology. That is not the case—in fact, the opposite is true, because our inhumane rulers have incomparably more power.

[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago (6 children)

I have to wonder: did they seriously mean it when they made "don't be evil" their company motto way back in the day? I'd be open to the idea that they were sincere at the time and then had their brains broken and their souls corroded by extreme wealth.

Or, maybe they were being dishonest even back then, and that mercenary attitude is what you need to succeed in Corporate America.

[–] TheJesusaurus@piefed.ca 17 points 2 weeks ago

It's difficult to describe the world in the pre-social media age. There was a time when Google was just a cool software company building cool things, and the don't be evil motto was probably genuine.

Software used to be an thing that you would buy and use if you needed it. It came on a disk. It wasn't this ever pervasive network of always on tools living in our homes and devices working to cultivate the ultimate consumer unit

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 9 points 2 weeks ago

did they seriously mean it when they made “don’t be evil” their company motto way back in the day?

When they weren't raking in tens of billions of dollars in government surveillance contracts and state-sponsored media ad buys? Probably.

But Google is under completely different management in 2025 relative to what it had at the outset in 1998. Perhaps the company's commitment to "Don't Be Evil" was violated the day they IPO'd. But Larry Page and Sergey Brin aren't in the driver's seats anymore. They sold their souls to join the oligarchy. Perhaps they assumed they could do more with an infinite line of credit than a rising star social media company. Or perhaps Google simply wouldn't be allowed as the global leader in search without spreading its cheeks and admitting corrupt bureaucracies to puppet it from below.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago

There was a time in the early 2000’s when tech companies got their customers by being better than the alternatives instead of just being obscenely wealthy and buying out all competition.

[–] BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 weeks ago

They removed the old motto from everywhere official many years ago. Don't be evil... Until you get enough market share that you don't have to care anymore.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 17 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

Today Palestine. Tomorrow us.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 16 points 2 weeks ago

LiveLeak was killed for a reason. You might not like what it was, but it would have been fine with hosting these things.

[–] carpelbridgesyndrome@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

In fairness they do this with ISIS videos too. It's hard to preserve warcrimes evidence that gets posted to social media no matter who committed it as every platform just deletes it. We need government policy here

[–] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I never had "wished we had a warcrimestube.com" on my 2025 disaster bingo, but here we are.

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 9 points 2 weeks ago

It was called liveleaks and it shut down.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 14 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Pre-internet there was a certain amount of natural limit on how much bullshit one could spread, because you had to print physical newspapers and find distributors, which meant that you had to have a name and a business address people could find you at.

With 2000s Internet this limiter was removed, but counterbalanced by everyone being able to present their own side for the marketplace of ideas.

Now in 2025 we’re in the worst of both worlds, where a tiny number of trillion-dollar companies control 98% of Internet traffic and are making it clear that they have no qualms abusing that power to shape public discourse.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Mrkawfee@feddit.uk 12 points 2 weeks ago

The Nazis also tried to cover up evidence of their genocide

[–] Reygle@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago

Google's slogan 15 years ago
Don't be Evil

Google's slogan today
Do~~n't be~~ Evil

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The fuck does Google even get out of this? At some point I really just do not understand why people are so aggressively supporting Israel’s genocide. Like, the fervor behind their support is crazy for all people who aren’t directly responsible for creating the problem and who could so easily just not support this shit.

I know there’s money involved but this is ridiculous.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 8 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

money, MOSSAD/IDF paid google millions to spread propaganda ads, and recently israeli signed a deal with google for its AI services(1.2bn), and also prevent other nations that requests data from said ai services when accusing IDF soldiers. googles video AI is very useful making alot of propaganda, the ones that been showing up on shorts alot.

[–] frankiehollywood@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 weeks ago

Boycott YouTube…

[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

people are happy to erode free speech norms & justify censorship of content they dislike on social media (private companies aren't legally obligated to refrain from censorship) until they reap the logical rewards of that unscrupulous ethos

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago
load more comments
view more: next ›