re: #340 Charles Johnson

You still haven’t explained how YouTube exercising their judgment on which videos they publish constitutes “censorship,” even by the Wikipedia definition that you’re trying (ineptly) to use to support your argument. That definition says “censorship” is SUPPRESSION of speech or other content, and if YouTube decides not to publish a video it’s just impossible to argue that this is equivalent to “suppressing” it.

You’re basically arguing against your own points.

Youtube is free to “suppress” the video if they choose to. They are a private company and are free to do as they wish. However, they seem to be well aware of the video and their own terms of service. There was no need for the whitehouse to request they review their decision to allow the video.