Remember when I went to the eagle festival and there were wolf-hounds fighting a chained wolf? I shot a video of the wolf fighting the dogs and posted it on YouTube, with a warning that it was graphic and with my opinion that this was a particularly horrific aspect to the otherwise incredible festival. I wasn’t posting it in order to glorify dog fighting or dog-n-wolf fighting, but to show how things are in modern Kyrgyzstan. Apparently it was deemed unacceptable by YouTube. When I logged in this afternoon in order to upload the videos in the below post, I received this message:
The following video(s) from your account have been disabled for violation of the YouTube Community Guidelines:
The following video(s) from your account have been disabled for violation of the YouTube Community Guidelines:
Dogs fight a chained wolf (warning: graphic) - (janekeeler)
Your account has received one Community Guidelines warning strike, which will expire in six months. Additional violations may result in the temporary disabling of your ability to post content to YouTube and/or the termination of your account.For your reference, a copy of this message has also been emailed to the address associated with this account.
I never did receive that email; no doubt it was funneled into my spam box.
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, the images depicted in the video are pretty horrible. On the other hand, that’s what goes on in modern-day Kyrgyzstan. Unlike the US where dog-fighting is something people gather illegally in basements to do, this was one of the main events in a large festival put on by the Krgyzstan Ministry of Tourism. The purpose of my blog (when I’m overseas, at least) is to give readers an accurate glimpse of what life is like wherever I happen to be. Anyone interested in going to Kyrgyzstan should be aware of the fact that animal rights simply do not exist. As such, I feel in part that by removing the video, YouTube has done its users a disservice. What do you think?
I never did receive that email; no doubt it was funneled into my spam box.
I have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, the images depicted in the video are pretty horrible. On the other hand, that’s what goes on in modern-day Kyrgyzstan. Unlike the US where dog-fighting is something people gather illegally in basements to do, this was one of the main events in a large festival put on by the Krgyzstan Ministry of Tourism. The purpose of my blog (when I’m overseas, at least) is to give readers an accurate glimpse of what life is like wherever I happen to be. Anyone interested in going to Kyrgyzstan should be aware of the fact that animal rights simply do not exist. As such, I feel in part that by removing the video, YouTube has done its users a disservice. What do you think?
6 comments:
Jane, I kind of have to agree with you. Not everyone shares the same values, and it was an informative video. If we are going to censor everyting because it might be deemed offensive to someone, we might be left with little left to watch, and it would largely slant our portrait of other parts of the world where those things are not only deemed apropriate, they are also culturally significant. I ran into something similar the other. I was watching some racially sterotypical cartoons that someone had posted from the thirties and forties. I did not find them racially charged at all to be honest, but they were deemed such, and when I went back to them, they had been removed. So, they do it all the time. It is a little crappy, especially, if they might be relevent to historical study. Imagione what would happen if they decided to remove Old books from library shelves because they contained the words negro or had scenes of dog fights or animal cruley. I mean every single guidebook that I am using from the turn of the century has some form of animal cruelty or torture in it, and they were culturally sanctioned. I have read more about poor white trash crackers also known as sandlappers for the amount of sand that they apparently ate than anyone could imagine. Now, I would personally find those things offensive today, but in terms of history, they really show how poor whites and other ethnic groups were racialized in order to uphold existing power structures. So, Jane, I largely concur with you. Maybe, you should send them an e-mail which says pretty much the same thing.
Christopher
I can see both sides of the story, Jane, considering that Youtube wants its site to be "safe"-ish for users.
I'm sure the "Community Guidelines" have something in it about violence.
Unfortunately, Terms of Service trump user service/disservice.
I don't really believe in censorship in general. However, assuming that YouTube is going to censor something, I think that they should censor that. I would be much less upset to stumble on amateur porn (which I assume YouTube also censors) than "dogs fight a chained wolf." Then again, that's why I never followed the link - people have a choice to NOT watch it - which is my argument against censorship in general.
Melissa
I agree with you, Jane. I don't think a video from real life should be banned from YouTube. Basically I don't think that ANYTHING should be banned from YouTube unless it incriminates people, or if it's hate speech that encourages violence. If you want to watch anything that's even remotely sexy on YouTube you have confirm that you're over 18; why can't they just have something to click through to warn people about disturbing content?
This is a nice description of a cracker family that I read today. They are everywhere in everybook that I read, it should give you a good idea of the racialization of native white Floridaians in every tourist guidebook that I have come across.
Christopher
The only human beings living anywhere along the road being four or five families of Florida natives, the genuine, unadultered Cracker- the clay eating, gaunt, pale, tallow, leather-skinned sort- stupid, stolid, staring eyes, dead and lusterless, un kept, hair generally two-colored, and such a shiftless, slouching, manner! Simply white savages- or living white mummires would perhaps, better indicate their dead-alive looks and actions. Who, or what, these crackers are, from whom descended, or what nationality, or what becomes of them, is one among the many unsolved mysteries of this state. Stupid and shiftless, yet shy and vindictive, they are a block in the pathway of civilization, settlement and enterprise wherever they existed. Fortunately, they are very few and rapidly decreasing in numbers, for they can not exist near civilized settlements. The four or five cabins we passed of these crakers were bare log structures, with low roofs, no doors or windows- merely openings or fireplaces; no filling between the logs, and usually no floors; no outhouses, wells, fences, and no gardens or plants, except a sweet potato patch. A near lake or spring supplies their water, hogs, cattle, game, their meat, and the tops of cabbage palmettos, sweet potatoes, and wild fruits, form almost their only diet, while pellets of clay eaten as a seasoning ingredient take the place of needed salt and pepper. Four women, All were of precisely the same size, with the same features, eyes, and hair, and a vacant stupid state, each wore a light colored faded calico dress, of plainest, scantiest possible make, quite clean( a surprising fact), and large, plain cotton sun bonnets; each wore a cheap, bright hued, cotton handkerchief around her neck; and they were all barefooted, carrying their low, thick soled shoes in their hands. The dress and kerchief appeared to be the only garments- no underwear whatever. They were a mother and three daughters but all looked the same age. They were going to a cracker dance. Think of a woman- a lovely tender woman! Walking barefoot twenty miles to a dance all night in a close cracker cabin, while whiskey perfumed cracker males, to the scraping of a wheezy violin in the hands of an old darkey; the scene lighted with pine knots; the feast of a hog, hominy, beef, sweet potatoes, and likely a few villainous compounds of flour, cheapest brown sugar, or syrup, and called cake or risin bread. And, perhaps that cracker ball will be kept up two or three days or nights. , until all the stick of edibles and whiskey is used up. The cracker, when resolved to give a dance, shoots some game and carves a hog, finds a market and sells his game for a little cash, lays in a stock of whiskey, a little flour, cheap sugar syrup, tobacco, hominy, or grits, more whiskey, coffee, or cheap tea, goes home, set the “wimmin folks” to baking, while he resolves himself to an invitation committee, and sets out on his lean, lank, cracker pony , and invites all the crackers for miles around to “cum round.” And they come. A fight generally ends the dance, and the best man wins the girl, for these matches are usually prolific of “jinin” matches. There is very little sexual immorality at these half-civilized gatherings, for the mothers are on hand and keep a sharp eye on the proceedings , while the men- the fathers- will shoot.
YouTube T.O.S. trumps all since it is their website. Hosting the video on your site with an independent platform avoids following other people's rules. :)
Post a Comment