Does YouTube have that bit thought then Gripper Stebson made Roland Browning "roll" along the floor and then he was so miserable and wretched that he walked out in front of a car and got run over and then finally the whole school was watching out of the windows overlooking the playground as Gripper finally got his ballex kicked in by some rastas (or sthg)?
COS THAT WAS F*CKING DRAMA, THAT WAS!!! :twisted:
OUT OF POSTS -
A "Mong" is a "MONGOLOID", one chromosome too many - but he (!) had wore a hat and he (!) had a job and he (!) Brought home the bacon so that (!) no-one knewwwwwww-eeeeeewwwww-eeeeewwwwwwww-eeeeeeeeeooooooooaw!
Meanwhile here is Roland and Zammo
frighteningly, Zammo is now fatter than Roland.
And no, it shouldn't be banned as "innappropriate", no more than Panorama or This Is David Lander should be banned.
I tell you who should be banned: YOU, you egregious racist mong.
It's not actual footage, it's got the participants faces pixellated out and Korean news logos plastered all over it.
Are you seriously suggesting Koreans shouldn't be allowed to do investigative journalism into what goes on in their own schools, just because they're a nation of barbarous loons who flay and boil dogs alive then eat them up yum going "mmm, that'll cure my cold!" ARE YOU??????
I don't think anyone should be bullied or physically abused, (except for self defence) but I didn't find it particularly shocking nor any reason for youtube to pull the video - there's far more violent act's posted on that site, type in "fight" it'll put things in perspective.
Are you lot only children or something? My brother used to slap me all over the place (until I got bigger) and my sister used to practically swing off my hair (till I smacked her on the knee with a torch)
So, no I don't think they need to moderate more strongly, I think the police need to make the streets safer for all those timid dudes that get their ass kicked by spides walking home from a bar / show.
It's there because it's the internet.. maybe it's someone's idea of "funny" or maybe someone posted it thinking it was shocking so more people could be 'aware' of the horrors etc...
The audio is all messed up but it's definitely a newscast of sorts. It's information at the end of the day, how someone interprets / acts on that is their own opinion and fair play to em.
Right, so if your wee brother was getting bullied and slapped around and someone posted it on YouTube, you'd be cool with that?
That is ridiculous. So because your sister and brother slapped you, it makes it ok? Give over mate. That kind of thinking makes my blood boil. So, say my mum or dad abused me, if I did the same to a child, it makes it more acceptable because it happened to me? Wise up.[/quote:7fea3ccca2]
Of course I wouldn't be ok with it, if you read my original post it says that I don't think any one should be physically abused. I'm the youngest of 3, most people I know have got into a physical confrontation at some point with a sibling that's life, maybe you need to wise up??
I don't know where you're trying to go with the whole "If my mum or dad abused me" thing - my parents treated me just fine. Once again so you understand - [b:7fea3ccca2]I don't think anyone should be bullied of physically abused[/b:7fea3ccca2] but I did not find it shocking.
My argument would be that Youtube is an entertainment platform and the History Channel one of education. And as far as letting adults choose what to view, where do we draw the line, especailly given some of the darker content the interweb has to offer?
Well lets be clear - he didnt so much kill Lot's wife as turn her into a pillar of salt. There IS a difference. Further to this, she proved to be a valuable asset to most Biblical fish and chip shops in the aftermath.
You can't say content like that should be put on a hugely mainstream site. Some underground weirdo site, yes. But the people in that footage are victims.[/quote:39a2731696]
Why not? Do you really want to pretend that 'it' doesn't exist by wishing it 'banished' to some 'weirdo' underground site, so some sick pervert can get exclusive kicks out of it? Nah. I don't think so, because the internet is used for many things, including prime nuggets of reality that we never used to see before in our day to day lives.
If you really don't like it then don't look at it, and if your worried that kids are viewing it then their parents should try harder to monitor what they do online.
I've seen some pretty disturbing things on youtube and my lesson was 'always read the blurb before viewing'.
[quote:cdb4dd6157="I'mDead"]My argument would be that Youtube is an entertainment platform and the History Channel one of education. And as far as letting adults choose what to view, where do we draw the line, especailly given some of the darker content the interweb has to offer?
Only my opnion though..[/quote:cdb4dd6157]
Fair point indeed, but youtube offers education and the history channel also offers entertainment, obviously not to the same ratio.
A good example of a horrible act that was brought to millions of TV sets globally was the Rodney King incident, ok fair enough he wasn't [i:cdb4dd6157]totally[/i:cdb4dd6157] innocent, but there's thousands of other clips of a similar nature. It promotes awareness as well as shock value. Inevitably the government draws the line on content via TV and other media sources - to get the really dark stuff online you have to dig pretty deep most of the time.
I guess it just boils down to how far is too far and where your moral barometer lies regarding such things. The OP was outraged by the video and questioned youtube's ethics and tho we both agree that it's flat out wrong, I didn't think it warranted absolute censorship / removal of content.
Such scenes are appaling and should hold a considerable amount of shock value for anybody who views them, however I can't help but think that they won't do that for a large portion of people.
The censorship boundaries have been pushed constantly for years and it's just lead to us being desensitised considerably, and not just with such things as this. It justs leads to younger generations believing than can get away with more. They are fearless, they have no concept of consequence, cause they only experience visual process and don't get exposed to the conclusions of such happenings. It's like being shown all the actions sequences of a film but not knowing the story and how it starts and ends.
Perhaps there is an arguement for tightening the cap on such content. At the same time you open up the old Orwellian argument again. More fuel for the bureacracy engine. Stick the hamster in the wheel.
But, yeah, Avril Lavigne is just plain wrong on so many levels. I like what Gore's done with her hair...