 We're back In case you don't know what I'm talking about YouTube took down our entire channel this morning deleted the whole thing told us It was permanent. We obviously freaked out We then made a fuss about this on on social media YouTube ended up Changing their mind. We still have not received a proper explanation For any of this an unaccountable corporation based in Silicon Valley took down our entire channel 40 million views No explanation no word this demonstrates the unaccountable power that YouTube have I also have to say it demonstrates The phenomenal support that we have online. We are so appreciative of everyone who tweeted to reinstate Navarra I am absolutely a hundred percent certain. We would not have been reinstated in in such a short space of time Were it not for you guys we are going to be talking about exactly what happened today and the wider Implications I'm joined by Aaron Bustani. How are you doing Aaron? I'm very well Michael. Thank you for asking all those are rather strange beginning today I have to have to say about 10 30 I messaged the Navarra media slacks saying guys Has our entire video channel just disappeared without any warning and that's exactly what happened quite disturbed Five years of our our life's work and we are also going to be joined by Ash Sarkar Any minute now. I will will be introducing her in a moment Let's take you through then step by step. What happened today if you As I'm sure you did try to go to the Navarra media YouTube channel this morning. This is what you would have seen This page isn't available. Sorry about that. Try searching for something else the cheek try searching for something else Oh, what is that about? That happened at the same time that they took down our channel We received this email from YouTube Hi Navarra media We have reviewed your content and found severe or repeated violations of our community guidelines because of this We have removed your channel from YouTube We know this is probably very upsetting news But it's our job to make sure that YouTube is a safe place for all if we think a channel severely violates our policies We take it down to protect other users on the platform But if you believe we've made the wrong call you can appeal this decision You'll find more information about the policy in question and how to submit an appeal Hello, and it says what our policy says spam scams or commercially deceptive content and not allowed on YouTube the implication being of course that Navarra media Produces and publishes spam scams or commercially deceptive Content I'll explain what that is in one moment. The rest of the email says how this affects your channel We have Permanently removed your channel from YouTube going forward. You won't be able to access possess or create any other YouTube channels. I actually hadn't really we couldn't have created an alternative Navarra media if this decision had held This would have been it You can what you can do next. These are your steps. You can read the guidelines and you can make an appeal I'll tell you about that appeal process in one Moment so to describe what we had been accused of here Spam scams or commercially deceptive content. We're not going to go to the whole guidelines because it's it's a little bit tedious But essentially what that's suggesting we did is that we published sort of fake Videos where you suggest what you were going to be talking about was Two celebrities who've just hooked up but instead when someone clicks on your video They're sent to some website where they can buy dieting pills. That's the kind of thing we were being Accused of so that's commercially deceptive You're luring people into your video to take them somewhere else unrelated to what the video Suggested as I say, we were really confident. We we we hadn't Fallen foul of this lots of people asked me How have you have you been found to have violated the community standards before is this a sort of third strike thing? No, we haven't in fact We have once and that was for producing anti-vax content What actually happened was we had published a short clip of an anti-vaxer and then debunked them In that case YouTube didn't do anything drastic like remove our channel. They gave us a little flag We appealed it and then that was removed. So there were no strikes on our channel. This was incredibly confusing for us in Response to this we email them. We said, well, we'll use this appeal process Let's try and get our channel back and this is the reply we get from YouTube so YouTube say hello Thank you for contact contacting us about your disabled Google account The Google accounts team will review your request and be in touch with an update as soon as possible Most requests take two business days to review, but some might take longer Thanks for your patience. So we're a channel who I've worked out of the past 28 days We've had 64,000 views a day. That's because of all your kind kind support and we weren't going to get a response for two days potentially more so they say You know, we have a tiskey sour plan for tomorrow night We had three clips that were due to go out today and we're expected to sit here with this automated response and wait for Two days or three days or four days potentially longer for someone to say Oh, this is this is clearly wrong or for someone to tell us. No, you might not have realized it But you you did breach our community guidelines We'll say we'll talk about what what YouTube did next first of all what I want to talk about is what we did at this point So we've got we've been suspended. We've got an unsatisfactory Response from YouTube. This was time for us to kick up a fuss I'm gonna introduce Ash Sarkar who is now ready in the stream and ash I want you to sort of explain, you know, what happened on on Twitter today There was a nice response wasn't there when we found out that our YouTube had been taken down without sufficient explanation and absolutely no warning We produced a statement and put it out now One of the things which I think has united the left the right in the center is this feeling that big tech giants Exercise far too much power unaccountable power. I think that that is a feeling which is broadly shared across the political spectrum and so after we put out a statement We got a lot of support from the left as you might imagine We had some very kind offers from left-wing labor MPs offering to take this further on our behalf Which we really appreciated but also support from people who might not necessarily agree with us David Davis being one person Julia Hartley Brewer Lawrence Fox You know Freddie Sayers from unheard Fraser Nelson messaged me As well as of course a huge outpouring of support and outrage from our dedicated subscribers and One of the things which I think then happened was that there was then pressure being put on YouTube Both from the public and then also from people who are a bit better connected than either me or you Michael Who are able to put questions to the YouTube press team directly and a couple of journalists who did that and also? Raise it with various contacts that they had within the organization Now I'm not saying that that is how things should be done All right, I think particularly if you are running a Journalistic outfit on YouTube There should be a pretty standard way to get these things resolved as quickly as possible and better yet a process Which would ensure that such mistakes couldn't happen in the first place But I think that it was that outpouring of support that outrage and then also there's quite difficult questions being put Directly to staff within YouTube itself that resulted in our channel being reinstated a bit quicker than those two business days I've been quoted to us earlier in the day So let's let's now look at how YouTube responded So as you'll know because we're speaking to you now. We were reinstated That happened at half one We were having a all hands-on on deck meeting working out how we could put pressure on on YouTube to reinstate us when it happened And this is the message from them Hine of our media We're pleased to let you know that we've recently reviewed your YouTube account and after taking another look We can confirm that it is not in violation of our terms of service We have lifted the suspension of your account and it is once again active and operational We'd like to thank you for your patience while we've reviewed this case Our goal is to make sure content doesn't violate our community guidelines so that YouTube can be a safe place for all and Sometimes we make mistakes trying to get it right We hope you understand and we're sorry for any inconvenience or frustration This has caused if you have any further questions Please feel free to reach out to us here now what you'll note there an apology very much appreciated We're sorry for for this mistake What's not there is any explanation as to what has happened as I said We've got a channel a hundred and sixty thousand followed with sixty four thousand people watching it a day If you just take the entire channel off the internet, that's a big deal We deserve an explanation for what has happened there, especially as we want to we want to be reassured This isn't going to happen again. We want to be reassured that whatever Whatever person complained to YouTube or whatever staff member decided they had a vendetta against us or whoever accidentally hit the red button So that's not going to happen again. No explanation There was then also this Fred So this is from the YouTube team YouTube on Twitter Responding to one of our statements on Twitter. So team YouTube said With 400 hours of video uploaded every minute to YouTube We count on our community members to know our community guidelines and to flag content They believe violates them. We review all flagged content quickly And if we find that a video does violate the guidelines, we remove it We also have a team that is dedicated to identifying and removing spam from YouTube Occasionally a video flagged by users or identified by our spam team is mistakenly taken down When this is brought to our attention we review the content and take appropriate action including restoring videos or channels that had been removed Now and I want to bring you in at this point What did you make of these of these statements from YouTube that say all this mistake our spam bots and our You know our people in the spam team they identified this took down your entire channel without any warning But now we've now we've realized it's a mistake. What do you make of those responses? Well, there's a few things Michael if you if you go back to the communications. You just you just Examined the first one is that in the initial communication from YouTube that I mentioned suspension. They say your channel has been removed It's only in the subsequent Communication where we're allowed back in That it's called a suspension. So it was apparently a suspension But it's only retrospectively called that then tying that back into the the the the Twitter thread you just show there That repeatedly talks about a video if a video Has issues if it's odd with our guidelines if a video does x if it did video does y z They didn't get rid of a video Michael. They got rid of a channel a bit different You know, if there's a if there's a misunderstanding over a single piece of content Explicable like they say 400 hours of content upload all the time. It happens However, this is a channel with the hundred and sixty six thousand subscribers 1.8 million views in the last 28 days No, we can use the YouTube space down in London. They say in that communication We have you know respect for the community members and they help us, you know sift Bad content from good. What about your creators? What about your creators the first communication we get from them is literally the minute they pull the plug on the channel Where's the communication and and look you in particular Michael Fox the whole team here at Navarra Media We've worked with YouTube years. We know their processes their protocol what we saw today was completely at odds with anything We've ever seen from YouTube Which is strange now. I'm not going to say why that happened the explanation needs to come from them But this wasn't I don't think the result of you know a single person complaining in an automated process Because that's simply not how what proceeded to happen happens I think there's a bigger explanation at play here and we have to hear what it was Some super chats were getting loads of those. Thank you so much for your super chats and for all of your solidarity Today jm with 42 quid says 42 thumbs down to have 42 quid. I love it when people play this game If the haters and anyone trying to silence great media, thank you so much It's incredibly kind Patrick Mannion and John Sankey both with 20 quid and the smart 25 quid abolish Silicon Valley We're going to address how this means we should relate to Silicon Valley on this stream. Do not worry Joseph Bates of a five a great your back. Was it just me or did it feel like right wingers were more supportive than centrists labor MPs not on The left I would say let's go on to that later. Let's go on to that right now though Actually, Ash, what do you think of that that particular point? Did you feel like right wingers were more supportive than than centrists when this happened today? From what I could see. Yeah, that that was the case So you did have people like I said Julie Hartley Brewer Lawrence Fox people who do not share our politics at all and normally Where I wouldn't even call it having in a debate, right? Like when normally we are at each other's throats on social media on our broadcasts all the time now I think the reason why there was that element of rallying around is because these people Really do market themselves as free speech absolutists. And so this is a real opportunity to demonstrate the Con not continuity, but just the Consistency of that viewpoint right so if they can stand up for Navarra media It means that the general world view free speech absolutism is upheld now I'm not saying there's anything cynical about that store It was support which was greatly appreciated I think the fact that we got so much support from across the political spectrum really did And I think that there was a lot of silence from certain centrists and you know those bits of the Labour Party who maybe have felt like they've been under The heat a bit under the laser eyes of one Mr. Michael Walker and Tiske Sauer who were strategically silent during that time As well as you know, many other centrist columnists Yeah, particularly those at the times I might say Um So, yeah, I do think that there was a lot more support coming from the right on this though I think that is because of you know that kind of free speech absolutism there And I think that what's really important as we come out of having you know Just narrowly escaped the permanent removal of our channel We should talk about both the protection of free speech and why that's important But also what makes our position different from theirs, right? We're not free speech absolutists We do believe in a regulated media environment particularly when it comes to you know corporate media the big boys like Murdoch and by account rather mere and you know the the Barclay brothers And so we should also talk about what what makes our view of regulation different and why that includes big unaccountable tech giants like Google We're gonna I have a cat wearing the cone of shame who is waking up from his anaesthetic and he is very hyper He's just happy that we're back. Well, I'm glad he's hyper. I was worried he'd be a bit low today So that's a relief Yeah, we'll address the council culture question in a moment. I should mention there were some people who were sort of like, you know Centrist liberals who did come out to support us which was Encouraging Robert Shremsley of the Financial Times definitely someone with very very different politics who came out and and said This was this was a terrible decision. I saw that was retweeted by Lucy Fisher at the telegraph Also, not a not a free speech. Absolutely. So there was some support from all different parts of the political spectrum But I I did also notice that it did seem to be People on that sort of free speech right wing side who did an ash. I think has explained very well Why a couple more comments and a McLeod with a fiver Hope this YouTube mistake will prove to be a funding boost to help Navarra become too big to fail. I Really agree with that comment We've been talking about this because I mean today actually has demonstrated how much widespread support we have I actually feel like it's you know in a way I feel reassured today because what I think Navarra media has demonstrated is that it would you know If someone at YouTube HQ wants to get rid of us for some reason it's actually going to be quite difficult for them That of course is is possible because we have managed to build You know a sustainable Impressive organization, which is thanks to thanks to all of your support. So thank you so much for that Nicola curtain of fire But I think YouTube we're afraid of losing a lot of advertising revenue because many very powerful voices speaking out against this There are a few more super chats there will be going to all of those throughout the show Aaron Obviously this tells us you know about the unaccountability of tech power this decision was made well We don't know where this decision was made We don't know who it was made by and we don't know why it was made But it it was you know for us at least a very very Consequential decision and if we hadn't you know rallied around people on social media, it could have been much more severe What does this tell us about the power of YouTube and the power of Silicon Valley an Extraordinary amount Michael because there's a few points to sort of bear in mind here firstly Not all of our revenue comes from YouTube actually a significant amount of our revenue doesn't come from YouTube But if most of it did and of course it does for many channels with large numbers of subscribers with advertising or Super chats, we wouldn't have any revenue. We would have lost the revenue by which we can create and the organization pay people Fortunately, we don't operate like that But there are other channels which do and I don't think this is acceptable that you can cut off the revenue stream For a media outlet where they potentially can't pay the bills can't pay their stuff and you don't give an explanation I find it extraordinary. There's not more due process around that Equal I think if we've been a bit younger, you know, three or four years ago, would we have been able to withstand this probably not And what does that say it means that what you get you get an apology from YouTube if you have more than a hundred thousand followers If you have some powerful people in the media that follow you does that strike you as fair? And so this is why you know countries have media regulators Michael. This is why you have laws around the media So that when transgressions are made or when people inside violence then they can be dealt with but that shouldn't be at the discretion of some people in Silicon Valley because right now the the real and terrifying situation globally is that two or three companies effectively Amazon Facebook YouTube Have a monopoly over what gets published or not great tweet from Vincent Bevin's friend of the show friend of yours I saw him retweet you as well today Michael He basically said there's I Imagine a majority of the world's leaders could be removed if Google and Facebook wanted to get rid of them Maybe not the other the leading lights but certainly in the global south and dystopias were written about governments with this kind of power 4050 years ago. Well, guess what corporations have it now and and those Corporations are immeasurably more powerful than the government's predicted by George Orwell or by Aldous Huxley immeasurably more powerful Michael Amazon like I say Google Facebook exercise Discretion over what can be published in literally hundreds of countries Remarkable and we clearly as I'm sure we'll talk about later on the show We clearly have to say enough is enough that is not acceptable and that's not a left right centrist issue This is about a free society Requires authorities beyond private businesses determining who can publish and who can't that is something that is wholly new And we should absolutely reject and push back against I Want to bring in Ash now and I do want to address this cancel culture question directly So actually you kick us off was this cat will we a victim of cancel culture today? Well, look until we have sufficient explanation for what happened. We simply don't know we simply don't know whether this was a Particularly shonky process that they have internally. It was one person's fuck-up, which doesn't excuse YouTube then you've got to ask yourself. Well, why aren't these proceed processes more robust considering YouTube and Facebook have such a huge amount of control over our, you know Communications infrastructure and the public sphere or was there something politically motivated here? It doesn't How do I put this we have had a video demonetized before when it featured The topic of Julian Assange and we also live streamed the Belmarsh Tribunal just a week ago So I think that potentially there is room to talk about the role of political interference I don't have any direct evidence of that and the reason why I don't have any direct evidence of that because YouTube have failed to explain anything In in detail or in any way, which makes this process transparent So I can't say whether or not we were a victim of cancel culture. We also don't know whether vexatious complaints played a role in our Flirtation with being permanently deleted and again if vexatious complaints did play a role in it Well, then you've got to ask well, why is YouTube's? Internal processes for dealing with them so flawed It's quite obvious that we're not a commercially deceptive or spamming or scamming Organization mostly because we don't really offer a commercial service people can voluntarily donate to us if they want to and so they Don't want to they can still access all of our services. There's not a scam It's not a pyramid scheme. We're not, you know promising an Avon lady who's never going to turn up so it would Just a tiny bit of critical thinking would tell you that this would be an inappropriate Complaint to lodge against us, but there's just a couple of other things that I very briefly want to touch on and one is this question of Well, how do we regulate our media environment? I am very proud that Navarra media are regulated by Impress rather than it so so for those of you who don't understand the difference between those things don't worry I didn't either impress is the only Independent press regulator the only press regulator Which has as part of its guidelines the recommendations from the Leveson inquiry now the reason why We are regulated by Impress and not it so is because we look to the Leveson inquiry We saw the way in which you know Rupert Murdoch's news empire Conducted itself around the term of the phone hacking scandal and said no We want to be part of making media better So I don't think that we should you know follow down this road of being you know free speech absolutists Which essentially is carte blanche for corporate media privatized media the thing that we need to talk about our means of democratic oversight of media in a way Which also includes these tech giants because whether we like it or not and you know I don't like it the majority of our communications infrastructure is owned and controlled by a handful of companies Look what happens when Facebook goes down. It's not just Facebook that goes down It's WhatsApp it's Instagram's all of these platforms that people really rely on not just in terms of you know Posting but communicating with their families with their friends and with their loved ones If you want to talk about the role that Google has on shaping the public sphere It's an enormous amount of control So we can either say well It's up to private corporations to make sure that that infrastructure is robust that the processes are fair And we are absolutely going to do nothing about that or we can say well These are things which have become public utilities. They've become central to the functioning of public life They've become central to the functioning of democratic life There's such there need to be subject to some kind of democratic oversight and that's what I think is really important to place this within a context of you know Regulating the media and the tech environment for the purposes of the public good Let's go to some more comments the your pogo with a hundred pounds. Thank you very very kind This is utterly appalling if this had stood it would have been one of the most serious attacks on our democracy in recent years a strong chance This might be related to tomorrow's heroic coverage of the Assange situation as I said We are not in a position to know the answer to that But I think Ash's Ash has pointed out why it's not implausible that that that's the case I do by the way recommend you watch the the Belmarsh Tribunal, which we streamed lots of really really Important speakers Graham Reed with 25 quid solidarity Navarra media What happened to the ever-brilliant video on bias in the BBC chaired by Ash? Am I imagining this or was it quietly removed? I Would need I would need a bit more info on which one it was we've obviously talked about the BBC in awful lot So I'd need to know which video you're talking about. We'll look into that We'll look into that Sam Corsa ran with a tenor. Thank you very much Navarra one YouTube nil So glad you're back up and running keep fighting the good fight guys and Ali with 20 quid Thank you so much. This was a warning shot next. They will remove you for days may need to find another platform I will continue supporting you now more than ever Solidarity with Navarra media as always will come back to that precise point. You've made there and the Thomas solidarity guys Daniel rhymes Honestly, the messages sound so template an algorithm sent it wouldn't surprise me if the algorithm took it down tech giants are too Reliant on them It's plausible I suppose I would be surprised if an algorithm can delete an entire channel because also it should be quite easy Pretend it should be quite easy to train an algorithm to not do that to channels with 160,000 Subscribers because obviously yeah, it might be the case that there are you know thousands of channels launched every day Which are intended to just scan people, you know to sort of like Find gaps in the in in sort of YouTube's Regulatory system, but they don't have 160,000 followers, right? It should be easy to teach an algorithm how not to take down media organizations, so I Would assume that a person made this decision, but again, we don't know because we haven't given any explanation Oliver count with a ten support all left media trash future corner spatti true and on Owen Jones Antifaad a tribune magazine. Well, there's your problem the world transformed, etc. Everyone list more and share Very well put do support all left media We've got lots of support from all of our our colleagues in in other Progressive platforms across the UK and the US and we were on I mean Jones show earlier Aaron Is it time there was a question there is it is it time? Eve YouTube obviously this this show is streaming on YouTube. We haven't left YouTube yet Some people suggest this should be an excuse to go and build an alternative platform And the previous question about cancel culture if that's all right do that first. Yes, please do. Yeah, I'll be quick Look cancel. I need to be censorship. I'm all the time in the world. I'll be quick fantastic Cancel culture and censorship aren't the same thing cancel culture is quite a new phenomenon. I think it does exist It's when for instance somebody gets a new job Jess Brammer at the top of the BBC and people find a tweet from ten years ago or an article from five years ago And they say she shouldn't have the job because of this or actually Michael Walker is a terrible human being because he He tweeted this ten years ago or he said this thing eight years ago. You're cancelled Okay, now there's clearly some overlap between cancel culture, which is quite new It's kind of contingent on this new digital environment We're all we're all finding our way through and censorship, but censorship has always existed What happened today was censorship arguably if it wasn't a mistake again, we don't really know but it could well be censorship And that's always existed 100 years ago. You would be or even let's go back Less recently more recently 20 30 years ago You'd be blacklisted from writing from a newspaper the point was Michael you could go and write for another one You know you being unable to write in one publication didn't disqualify you from participating meaningfully in the public sphere What we're now experiencing with YouTube Facebook It's something quite different Michael because they're not like a newspaper They're a monopoly the point of Facebook the value of Facebook is that there's one Facebook everybody's there The point of YouTube is that there's one YouTube everybody's videos are there and so this is wholly different Cancel culture. Yes, it exists. It's a thing censorship somewhat distinct and Increasingly problematic in a world of platforms, you know, it's always existed, but you could always go somewhere else There was an element of competition between media outlets No, I'm not saying 20 30 years ago with Rupert Murdoch everything was hunky-dory at the Sun newspaper in the 1980s I'm not saying that We're moving to something quite new and innovative Well, like I said earlier two or three companies effectively exercise a monopoly over the global media conversation quite remarkable And this is only accelerating and it's only going to get worse So we need a grown-up conversation around media censorship and monopolies and this idea of oh well you said cancel culture Doesn't exist. You've been cancelled Not the same thing censorship is age-old but in the 21st century more relevant than ever We've got a really interesting question. I want to take on as well Andy. Sure How do we on the left call for more oversight and tech censorship without appearing to be making the same arguments that the right are about Tech send censorship. I'm kind of interpreting that question as as being about is Are we now on the same side as and people who say YouTube should never take anything down including say for example Alex Jones's channel the left are against corporate power. We're against corporate power We don't think corporation should be able to make unaccountable decisions about what can and cannot be said in what are You know inescapable public spheres You can't just say oh well YouTube's just a private company will go work on some other video channel No, YouTube is where the people are if you kick us off YouTube that is something you should You know, you need to be accountable for those decisions So the left is against tech power the left isn't against regulation So it's never been the case at the left hate regulation and in you know, my ideal media environment There would be some democratically controlled regulator that would mean that if you're putting out misinformation about vaccines Implanting chips that control you via Bill Gates, right then my ideal regulator would probably Well, definitely take your video down. It might take your channel down. I'm not sure if you did it over and over again So so I don't think This this dichotomy between either you're in the pocket of of YouTube and these Silicon Valley tech giants Or you have to be a free speech absolutist. I think it's a bit of a false dichotomy I'm in favor of regulation, but I'm in favor of regulation Which is it's controlled democratically by democratic bodies and in an incredibly transparent and accountable way That is the opposite of what has happened Here Ash do you want to comment again on this sort of cancel culture question or should we go on to sort of alternatives to YouTube? No, I'd like to talk about cancel culture because I agree with Aaron I think that these are two discussions which have been muddied up I think what cancel culture refers to are the informal mechanisms of Disagreement and social Condemnation which are Designed or have the unintended Consequence of limiting somebody's access to a platform whether that is a Role in public life like in the media or having a Twitter account or whether it's something like having a job Now I think that as you said earlier on the orange show This is vastly overblown So one of the problems is yes, there has been a change within the culture which has tended to focus on Whether or not we're having a discussion rather than who's saying what and who wins that discussion That is a change in the culture social media has I think you know created this quite nebulous terrain where we don't know the beginning and the end between Something that somebody said and how much of an impact it should have on the rest of their lives now I think that this is something which there aren't straightforward answers to I Would like to think that Nothing I say in social media should have an impact on my real life Would I think the same if somebody who I don't know works with children came out with very pedophile sentiment Or if somebody said that they encourage You know violent jihad or if somebody said, you know, hey, I'm a neo-nazi Well, no, I wouldn't write so we all agree that there should be some limits And we're in the process of socially negotiating what those limits are So I do think that council culture does refer to a change in the culture but what I think has happened is that Those who have powerful platforms because maybe they work in the media or perhaps they're a politician One of the things that they've done is that they've taken all kinds of condemnation Criticism and expressions of disdain and said all of this is council culture anytime and being criticized It is a cancellation that is what's happening and I think that there are a lot of bad faith discussions around this One of the things that I think is quite gross is that you have a view of free speech Which says well, you can you can say what you like apart from I shouldn't have the job that I do now I think that is a curtailment of free speech, but that is different and distinct from censorship now again We're not anti-censorship absolutists I think it's fair enough to have rules governing incitement racism misogyny threats of violence so on and so forth on Public platforms, I think that's fair enough. I think that's a good thing We have to recognize that the amplification of speech through social media or publication Does something which is unique which is the potential to incite either through an explicit call to action or through? Implicit calls to action what we would call the stochastic effects of speech acts and publication I think we need to recognize that we need to take that Responsibility seriously, and I actually think that media organizations on social media Individual journalists on social media should be held to much higher standards than they and they are and that's why I said Very very proud that we're regulated by impress That doesn't mean that the people who should decide those standards are these huge Tech Corporations who operate in a completely unaccountable way whose processes are opaque to the rest of us They operate within this kind of black box And then whenever you have a problem with social media whether that is the spread of misinformation or whether it's the problem of online threats harassment Violence racism that you go well the answer to this is to concentrate more power in the hands of the tech giants I think that that is a very dangerous place for our politics to be and unfortunately It's being driven there by you know even Center-left and liberal MPs who have been responding to this You know that barbaric and brutal murder of David Amos by going let's put more power in the hands of tech monopolies I think that that is is is really reckless and it's docking I think the question of what democratic accountability and oversight of these platforms should look like Let's go to some more super chats Alex Mills try twitch It's huge right now and socialists like Hassan Abi have done really well on it Maybe stream on both YouTube and twitch y'all should have Hassan on by the way Tiskey sour we do actually stream both on YouTube and twitch We're gonna start trying to make some you know native twitch twitch content at the moment We just put some of our YouTube content on twitch, but we'll hopefully move beyond that I would love to have Hassan Abi on on Navarra media if you want to if you want to encourage Hassan to come on Please do I think he's quite a busy guy You can follow our twitch on twitch.tv slash Navarra media Patrick Ramoon says it's far too easy to take a youtuber down with mass reporting I've seen it happen to a political creators to solidarity from Ireland and end you end YouTube's poor treatment of its creators 100% concur Christian de la croix Glad you guys are back. Watch you all the time. I would love to see a discussion between Ash and Brianna Joy Gray That's Bernie Sanders press secretary For his campaign would be a really interesting discussion. I would love to see that too. We should try and make that happen Fresh DAX stream on peer tube big open source software information wants to be free So does software open source is basically communism for software and Wizard of car says I suspect this is a bigger story than you realize and might become much bigger. Who has the power to delete a channel? What's the precedent? I Want to go back to that question. I asked you before I'm glad we I'm glad we stayed longer on council culture because it was very interesting but Aaron these questions about should we be leaving you YouTube is on a migrating to peer tube we've just been told about or or a Or you know a completely different independent platform What's your take on that? Are we too reliant on YouTube? Well, one of the problems of course if you go to twitch is that it's owned by Amazon and that goes back to my previous point about Realistically if we're trying to evade the big monopolies Facebook Amazon Google you're gonna really struggle and that's not that's not going away anytime soon Of course the reason why we do participate in these platforms my close it allows us to reach a very large audience We won't be able to do that on these smaller platforms even though the technology Politically speaking is far closer to our beliefs We want to take those beliefs and our arguments and our ideas was large an audience as possible So there's something of a contradiction there. I think in the short term The left can do three things firstly. It has to defend free speech and it has to defend media freedoms In other words, it can't allow the right to own this as a subject Which is something which has happened in the last four to five years Completely holds actually with the history of left-wing politics Rosa Luxemburg has quote after quote after quote of media freedom and freedom of assembly and freedom of speech And that's something where the left has been really weak It's the first is defend freedom of speech robustly don't allow the right to own it Secondly, I think every time this kind of infringement on our freedoms happens from the likes of YouTube Amazon etc We need to push back and say that's not acceptable But it doesn't just apply to the tech giants Michael also I think has to be part of a broader defense of due process and the rule of law and fairness because what I've repeatedly seen is I hate to say this liberals centrists not always some liberals have defended us today, but liberals and centrists who say oh well Maybe shouldn't feign shouldn't be able to form a government because they won't adopt the IHRA or Maybe this person shouldn't be allowed on television because they've said Something would you disagree with? Which happened repeatedly with the left in regards to the IHRA for instance, you know I'm a starting what's it doing on Sky News. He said that labor shouldn't adopt the IHRA anyone who's serious about the left Winning the debates in the 21st century has to recognize how utterly toxic that mindset is How it is completely at odds with the values and the policies and the politics that we tried to advance So firstly defend freedom of speech Secondly that has to be manifest in certain actions and responses to things day to day week to week month to month Excuse me Finally thirdly and finally my apologies to people listening with it with earphones and headphones Thirdly and finally Michael we on the left need to determine a campaign around how Democratic elected politicians and media regulators Interface with the likes of YouTube Facebook Amazon And actually hold them accountable because we can't just keep on having these ad hoc campaigns and defend these guys reinstate these guys We need Regulations in this country which clearly states when the likes of YouTube can and cannot And somebody that should not be up to Silicon Valley It should be up to democratically elected holders of public office The fact it isn't is a very very very new state of affairs So the idea that it's a whole new problem and we have no solutions to hand Ridiculous we've had media regulators and we've had politicians Involving themselves in these debates for a century Not always for for good sometimes for ill But it's obviously a better foundation than what we're moving towards so yes, we need those campaigns the ad hoc ones Yes, we need the values, but I think fundamentally now We need to say the next time there's a labor government in Britain for instance on the left We want to talk about media reform, you know, we want to talk about How we're gonna have a regulator effectively dealing with the newspapers, of course But I think we also have to talk about platform capitalism and censorship on smaller creators Has to be part of that media-formed conversation Which of course in Britain has been in circulation now for more than a decade with the Lieberstein inquiry and murder console This is all you know one part of the same whole my worry is Michael You know talk radio was chucked off YouTube somewhat like ourselves. They came back in because They're a big business. They've got Murdoch. They've got lawyers. We managed to get back in we've got lots of supporters But that's clearly not a universalizable way of conducting this We need far fairer processes and so We can't let this go so people think oh Navarra media are running an hour conversation about themselves being censored from YouTube on YouTube how stupid is that? No, there's a far bigger debate at play here And it's only going to get more person over the coming years and decades I mean, I I I agree with you there on the on the question of migrating elsewhere I I want Navarra media to be a platform that reaches people who don't already agree of our politics That's possible because we've got you know our Really valued regular viewers watching the videos liking the videos getting them up in the algorithm That means more people see them if what we did instead was direct all of our existing fans to a different app I think that would really hinder our growth So I'm very much in favor of of sticking on sticking with YouTube for now But you know demanding they they do better I just want to ask you to clarify something Aaron just because I want to know if there's a Disagreement between us free because that's always useful And can be interesting for the audience or if we're just putting different emphases on things So yeah, you've talked there about the left have to depend free speech Yeah, Ash sort of mentioned that that she agrees with limits to free speech I mean, is that a disagreement or do you want to clarify what you meant there? Well, so for instance, we were talking about censorship earlier on and you know Can I give any examples where somebody should have been censored and I certainly can Tommy Robinson on Facebook his account was removed because he was engaging in incitement He was actively jeopardizing the safety of a young person who he was maliciously lying about And so there's a textbook example of somebody who's behaving in such an egregious way Not just the odds with you know the public interest, but actually someone's safety where you could say look This is pretty obvious We're gonna take that platform away from them because they're engaging in incitement or you know He was essentially compromising court cases which were ongoing etc etc I think that doesn't fall under free speech. Hey look, you can have your opinions But you don't have a right to broadcast them to a mass audience which further jeopardize that person or undermine that case very different things I Think probably on the nuances on particular cases. We probably do disagree But I think in the general I think we're of a mind on that aren't we Michael And I do these important to say that freedom of speech for an individual is very different for freedom of speech for you know Times times newspaper, you know if one person says something stupid which undermines somebody's safety Of course, it's unacceptable when you've got a newspaper doing it with an audience of millions of people on an industrial scale Clearly we need even greater accountability for that and actually in this country. We're moving to a situation Chorus called on by much the political class I must say off the last week where we leave the likes of the Murdoch press alone We leave the likes of the the path or media oligarchs alone and we focus on some, you know anonymous Twitter account With a with a with a username which sounds like a Wi-Fi password priorities all wrong Hmm. No idea. I I mean, I think that's very reasonable I think it is also worth saying because something about how do you end up not being lumped with the right in this I think there will be situations and there should be where we say we might disagree with what you've said You right winger who hates socialism, but you have every right to To say that there will be other situations where it's you right winger just incited violence against one specific person or you right winger spread misinformation about vaccines turning you into, you know Animals or killing you or whatever and you don't so we need to be able to have this conversation where it's not just if you agree with Me, it's okay. If you don't agree with me, you're you know Causing untold damage and therefore you have no right to be able to speak. Do you want to come back in on this Ash? Yeah, yeah, I really would like to so I think that the really core example here is Donald Trump and the suspension of his Twitter account Now this was something we're at the time I was like, I don't think that this is something which should be uncritically celebrated I recognize that how Donald Trump was using his Twitter as the president of the United States had Uniquely high stakes so what it meant for him to disparage the integrity of an election or to you know Put out tweets which could be seen as you know inciting The attack on the Capitol that we saw on the 6th of January that there are unique responsibilities that Twitter has as a platform because by keeping these tweets up by keeping this account intact It could have gotten many people killed but people did get killed on January the 6th So while I recognize that this is a tension and that maybe this was correct in this case because of the very specific Circumstances, this is not a power that I want to be within the remit of big tech companies Where they've got to make the call on the day about which elected representative is okay to keep in which one isn't because I don't want to see that power being used against a democratically elected left-winger or a democratically elected anybody who say isn't Doing what Donald Trump did which is disparage the integrity of an election results in such a way which you know Was likely to get people killed but you know a politician who is taking a stand against the interests of capital for that to be an Unrestricted power in the hands of tech giants. I think is is very very dangerous indeed. So even when It is something where I go well this decision ultimately fell on the right side You then have to take a step back and go but this shouldn't have been their decision to make the first place And so we should really think about how and why that was allowed to be the case And then secondly, I guess I just want to sort of talk about, you know, free speech and maybe there's an element of context To free speech. Um, I don't uh lecture anymore, but I was for the past four years. I was lecturing at the sandberg institute in Amsterdam bang bang and What my Obligations were as a lecturer were very different from the kinds of freedoms. I enjoy as a as a private citizen so let's take an example of Let's say for instance. I wanted to campaign to Strip gay people of the right to get married in this country. Let's let's say that's something which I felt really strongly about I as a private citizen Should have the right to express that as a political opinion the right to organize on that basis If I so want to it's a horrendous point of view It is not one which I think should be socially tolerated in society But I should have the legal right to speak out on it and to organize on that if I so wish However, if I'm then teaching in a university context and I'm saying look my campaigning to strip the right To marry from gay people has absolutely zero impact on my teaching Whether or not I have you know gay people in my seminars, you know, you should just In the interest of academic freedom. You have to leave me alone. I think that's where we go. Well, no No, there are some responsibilities you have in particular roles which are impacted by your Speech acts outside of that context now again, this is socially negotiated This isn't something where I think you can go and hear the hard and fast rules But the reason why I bring up that example is the framing of the Kathleen stock stuff that's going on in Sussex Is I think something which only sees freedom of speech is belonging to the person who's already in power Now I think the students have the right to politically organize to question who it is that's employed at their university because that is also Free expression right And so it's something which I think is really important Which is we tend to look at this question from the person who's already in power We tend not to think very much about the way in which different rights conflict Perhaps different obligations and responsibilities that we have voluntarily entered into and that this isn't something which I think Can be neatly swept away by one absolute or the other But you actually have to get stuck in and think these things through critically rigorously and seriously I mean, I think we're in danger of getting sidelined here because this this is this is an issue about corporate power fundamentally I do disagree with you there. I think I think A lecturer in any subject if they're against gay marriage As long as they're not harassing gay people in their class That's fine. I'm a gay guy. I'm happy to get taught by someone who's a fundamentalist christian Who's got really interesting views about Economy but does on that basis outside of the classroom just campaigning on that basis outside of the classroom Yeah, I think I'd be fine with that. Yeah, if they feel strongly about it if if if they kept bringing it up in class If I were the their the head teacher of that university, I'd say please keep this campaign off of campus But I think people are people have a right to their decision I think you do need to make it about what happens in that workplace You know unless you're talking about, you know, a nazi or something like that But I I do worry about saying because you've got these Opinions and practices outside of the workplace You shouldn't be in in the workplace. And I think it's also fair enough to tell people Maybe we should do an entirely separate live stream on this, but I don't think that's quite what I said That's not quite what I said I'm not saying that this should be a blanket rule But I think that we should look at those things and where they conflict quite seriously if I mean, would we would we be saying the same thing about race? We're saying the same thing about race if Say I was a physics lecturer and outside of the classroom. I was like, yeah, I just don't think black people should get the vote Well, I I think black people shouldn't have the vote is much more serious than gay people shouldn't be able to get married essentially It's it's also about it's going to be about, you know, where Where the debate is at this point in in time, right? I think there are loads of loads of people I could happily hang out with if you don't want gay marriage It's I don't even you know, even if I was someone who was getting married It doesn't feel like a massive threat to my rights black people can't vote that feels Commitment, Michael. I think I think we've strayed into into other territory. Maybe this is just you being no one's going to marry me Anyway, I don't care about these things. No, I mean I I think you're I think the the point you raise is shows that there is going to be some negotiations about where the red lines are drawn Um, I accept actually that if you yeah, even if they didn't bring up that black people shouldn't vote um, I think if a lecturer is campaigning for that outside of University that does raise some questions. So you've You've successfully I think won the argument. This is a blurry line. Maybe we just draw the line in different places Um, just in Hancock with a fiver. I'm a supporter via the navara website. Thus bypassing youtube Very important point. The most we love all of these super chats. We massively appreciate it the thing that does Mean the most to us and that really allows navara media to grow is regular donations on our Website so that's navara media dot com slash support Um, mdb also says very much related finally signed up to send monthly donations after what happened today I'm unemployed. So it's not a lot, but I'm a big fan We massively appreciate that Especially I mean I presume as as you're unemployed if you're in britain You might have been subject to that that 20 pound universal credit cut This is not a good country to be unemployed in um our unemployment benefits up. I think you know One of the worst in in in the OECD in the in the in the rich world If you look at it in terms of comparing it to to what prior incomes were terrible system Um, so thank you very much. Um, Juanita Osen says this censorship of your platform is alarming in a media landscape skewed to the right and massive corporations Your platform is so important for your unapologetic progressive coverage. Keep up the good work Learning to fly says so glad you're all back Did any of you notice any of the awful comments sent to oan jones when he posted the live video with ash and michael earlier today? I'm afraid I didn't I'll have to go look at those Um, was that one? I I presume that was under his twitter post Um, luke lustig bruce. I've seen lots of channels reinstated only for youtube to go back on themselves and uphold their original decision How will you organize a response if that happens to you? Oh god? I thought this was over Oh, I'm very upset to read about that. But I mean that's that's definitely an eventuality We should plan for to be honest. I think this this thing of reaching out to people Getting people from across the political spectrum to say, you know, this this this seems wrong It's also worth noting that it's I mean they still It seems completely ridiculous what they did suspend us for we're definitely not A spam account, right? I mean, I don't I don't think we breach any of their guidelines, but that just seems completely irrelevant Xena walsh it would be great to see the people viewing this converted into subscribers Solidarity with the entire team can't believe I've gone a full stream without saying if you haven't already Do subscribe to the youtube channel. Thank you so much say no for that Uh suggestion that reminder doing fox's job for him Um, the cockerel leftist politics is nothing without power Which means convincing as many people as possible without real power. It's just a talking shop Absolutely agree postal wench take your cue from the young turks. Chen is expanding over as many platforms as possible Hopefully we will be able to hopefully we will have a viable network someday. Good luck That's quite a good point putting your eggs in lots of different baskets. As I say, we are going to make native Twitch content, but although as as Aaron says that's still owned by by amazon But at least you you know, you're spreading your bets Although they do often actually tend to cluster So it's often the case. I think as it was with donald trump that once one person kicks you off They all they all fall into line Um ms solidarity comrades instead of a platform migration I do suggest are similar to the last comment simply diversifying platforms more access points to your content is only better I feel obviously that takes time and money. So take some of mine. Thank you very much. What a lovely comment um Aaron there's a few oh, let's let's go to let's go to some of these more of these comments Just three more glad you're back anyone coming up for cop 26. Yes Um, I'll be holding the fort in london. Aaron is going up gary is going up I some of i'm not precisely sure who are from our articles team are going up. I think charlotte's going up. No claire's going up um, anyway, we're gonna be making we're gonna be making absolutely great content there. Um and Going meant for what you should publish on odyssey. You can sync your current youtube content over there in a few clicks It's decentralized too interesting we should check that out And sab gelma with two quid. Thank you so much solidarity with narabara Bet fox freaked out fox did freak out to be fair everyone freaked out, you know, I think fox Are very very hardworking You know exceptionally talented tisky sour producer. He keeps his eye, you know Owl like focused on our youtube stat. So I'm I was probably just presumably just a massive hole in your morning. Wasn't there fox? He says yes um, aran I won't get I suppose a loose question anything you want to add in terms of what we've been discussing already But also, I mean, what would you say your big takeaways from today? What what have you learned today? What do you feel about navara media and and the media in general and and big tech that you you hadn't realized yesterday Well, I think that the conversations you were just briefly having with ash hugely interesting And I think it's important to say that just because people disagree over certain examples doesn't mean that they disagree over the big principles Which I think is is inevitable I don't think any two people are going to agree on every single example In terms of how to deal with these things, but I think the conversation around free speech for individuals and media freedom in a world of platforms and monopolies are quite different So so, you know, you could have a school where somebody has an opinion who is a teacher And I agree with you mark if they're a private opinion and they keep themselves I think it has to be a very high threshold to say you can't work here I think black people are not being able to vote. I think it meets that Um, but you know, I think it has to be quite a high threshold But at least the person who then loses their job if they're told look your beliefs aren't congruent with the beliefs of this institution Sorry, you have to go that person can go and work elsewhere They can find an institution which is congruent with their values The problem we have with media freedom in a world of monopolies is that If you're not on youtube and facebook or or or amazon Then you're nowhere and I say amazon. I mean twitch, of course You're nowhere. You simply can't insert yourself in the conversation About how we should run society how we should do things you can't have opinions at scale Which obviously for for for journalism is killer So I think they're two quite distinct things Uh, they're both hugely important and I think the cancel culture stuff relates the freedom of expression stuff for individuals I think it's quite different for For the media and I think what happened today, Michael is just seeing that happen seeing the whole channel go I never thought that would happen You know, I thought you know, you might get a video demonetized as misunderstandings Seeing the whole channel go. I just thought wow these people have such Ordinary arbitrary power And we have to do something about it And of course, it's a happy ending for navara media. We think so far Uh, but but that's not acceptable It's not acceptable. Um And that you know, it's us today, but I think for for journalists out there I think the reason one of the reasons why we've got so much support Is they recognize that if if navara media is banned from youtube they could be as well By which I mean sort of more mainstream legacy organizations This is a serious serious issue and I think we all have to stand up to it And that's why there was such widespread support in response. I think actually Except from Some sections of the labor right for understandable reasons I like that for understandable reasons. That's very understanding of you, Aaron Um, ash, I've got the same the same question for you. What did you what have you learned today? What do you think today about the tech the tech giants the media that you that you weren't already thinking yesterday Oh I think that what this did was really Ram home just how precarious All of our grasp is on being able to access the public sphere Because when that interaction with the public sphere is mediated by a private corporation You are essentially in an incredibly disempowered relationship and that can't change Until you address this question of ownership if our only way to access Each other our only way for us to access a mass audience is through Unaccountable corporations Billionaire interests. Well, I don't think that we can truly say that we live in a democracy And so that's what was really Rammed home for me today. The other thing is that Stuff will always kick off when I'm in a yoga class It's always happens and then I check my phone the navara slack is going mad gary's having kittens and I just think You know what this isn't this isn't very zen put me back in shavasana. That's where I want to be I'm going to um concur with with what you and Aaron have said but take a slightly different angle Which is what I have you know thought about learned today that I didn't know yesterday was quite how broad The support and recognition for navara media is and quite how quickly Everyone would run to our defense and I think we've seen today how Important that is. Yes. These are unaccountable You know giant tech organizations. We don't really have any proper recourse if they make an unjust decision, but they are um, they do apparently respond to social pressure and we we really Managed because of all of your support because of all the people who watch this show and tweet about us and follow Us on twitter and insta to I think make a real noise and it seems to me, you know, it was very quick Actually, I thought we were going to be down for for for quite a lot Longer than this obviously in the back of my mind There was this this small fear that maybe the whole thing's gone. We're going to be down forever I thought most likely we'd get reinstated in in a couple of days time But the fact that it happened so quickly and you know hasn't disrupted our output that much There's a couple of clips who would have put out this this morning will move on We'll we'll do tisky sour tomorrow at 7 p.m. As ever on a a wednesday night And I think that's because of all of you guys and also the people, you know Who aren't fans of Navarra, but who recognize that that what we do is is legitimate valuable journalism And it shouldn't be squashed out by by a bureaucrat in in the office of some some silicon valley tech company For now, I think we've covered a lot of ground today We are going to wrap up there as I say thanks again for everyone who's given us so much support today As ever if you Support us financially already. Thank you so much If not, we value regular donors so much if you go to navarramedia.com Slash support you can date the equivalent of one hour's wage a month Thank you for all of your super chats tonight and we really appreciate it really really uplifting after a stressful day Aaron Bustani I'm so glad we still get to talk to each other on youtube. That was my my main worry Can you imagine we would have had to go to instagram live? The same to you ash, you know my monday mornings. What would they be without chatting to you on a on a youtube channel? It would they'd have been Diminished they'd have been diminished so much, but you know what Aaron? I want you to become an instagale You know get your contouring done your highlighting done. Maybe you could be you know, somebody who unboxes stuff we're living You know what my my final word is that sounds easy in in the interests of Diversifying if you already subscribed to us on youtube, why don't you consider following us on instagram following us on twitter liking our page on facebook? and following our page on twitch tomorrow We have an instagram live. I think that's you two because i'm not involved Yeah, we do so tomorrow evening Aaron and me will be talking about Squid game what it says about capitalism and also maybe this broader genre of sci-fi speculative fiction Which is holding up a mirror to the most? Barbarous and cruel aspects of our economy. So Brunching out a bit from squid game having a little look at black mirror. Maybe having a chat about parasite as well um Follow us on the navara media instagram. We will be going live tomorrow evening And make sure you bring your green track suit That's mandatory I'll have to watch that back. I won't be able to watch that live because i'll be preparing as ever Um for tisky sour at 7 p.m. Tomorrow. So check out our instagram live at 5 our youtube channel if it's still there at 7 p.m Thank you for all of our all of your support. Sorry. We're back. We're happy to be back You've been watching navara media. Um Good evening