Talk:BitChute
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the BitChute article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 60 days  |
 | The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
 | Before requesting any edits to this protected article, please familiarise yourself with reliable sourcing requirements. Before posting an edit request on this talk page, please read the reliable sourcing and original research policies. These policies require that information in Wikipedia articles be supported by citations from reliable independent sources, and disallow your personal views, observations, interpretations, analyses, or anecdotes from being used. Only content verified by subject experts and other reliable sources may be included, and uncited material may be removed without notice. If your complaint is about an assertion made in the article, check first to see if your proposed change is supported by reliable sources. If it is not, it is highly unlikely that your request will be granted. Checking the archives for previous discussions may provide more information. Requests which do not provide citations from reliable sources, or rely on unreliable sources, may be subject to closure without any other response. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=icon}
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
Bias?
edit"The platform also hosts misinformation related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The conspiracy theory video Plandemic has been viewed on BitChute millions of times after having been removed from other platforms for spreading medically harmful misinformation."
My quotes and my bold above. Wouldn't it be better to include any original sentences that contain those words as quotes directly from the articles to make it clear that those word choices are the opinion of the original writer rather than that of the Wikipedia editor of the article? The way this section is written now clearly shows personal bias in my view. "Conspiracy theory" has the tinge of bias about it as well, though I guess one could make the argument that the producers of Plandemic did indeed propose a theory (actually a hypothesis) dealing with what they maintain is a conspiracy. Pretty obvious that term was included as a means of attacking not only the video's content, but the Bitchute platform itself. RRskaReb talk 08:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- You'll find that Plandemic is described as a conspiracy theory on it's own article because we have plenty of reliable sources that describe it as such. OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:10, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- No the entire section is up for removal. The site has taken neutrality as their stance, so we need to include Verizon and AT&T for having users that were on other sites also sign up on this site . Has zero relevancy. Objective Reason (talk) 15:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's not clear what you are proposing to change. OhNoitsJamie Talk 16:21, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- No the entire section is up for removal. The site has taken neutrality as their stance, so we need to include Verizon and AT&T for having users that were on other sites also sign up on this site . Has zero relevancy. Objective Reason (talk) 15:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Association with the 'Nazis' was a long time ago
editPlease check out Ofcom recent articles, it is a UK government agency, the platform is now fully compliant and this article is basically slandering it. I removed that it hosts neo Nazis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xyron1987 (talk • contribs) 03:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Feel free to provide reliable, independent sources that support your assertions that the public perception of the platform has changed. However, the Ofcom article is not such an article — it merely notes some changes that BitChute promised to make, while also noting "While we welcome these improvements, we are aware of reports alleging that content likely to incite violence and hatred continues to be uploaded to BitChute, can be accessed easily, and may pose significant risks to users." GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 15:13, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, but do you see how this isn't fair? Even YouTube had Nazi content in the beginning, which was eventually blocked and the users banned. I'm not asking to remove the entire statement, just the part about hosting neo-Nazis. Twitter X and Rumble have a lot of nazi content, yet there's no mention of neo-Nazis in their opening paragraph of a Wikipedia article that millions read. BitChute is a small operation, and descriptions like this can be damaging.
- https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/illegal-and-harmful-content/bitchute-03-10-2023/ Xyron1987 (talk) 03:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- See WP:NPOV: "representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." Independent, reliable sources have overwhelmingly discussed Bitchute as home to neo-Nazis and other such content, and so the Wikipedia page reflects that. If Bitchute has indeed changed their platform moderation strategy then perhaps they will eventually become known for something else. However, there has been little in the way of coverage of the site since the Ofcom press release, so it would be premature to suggest that that has indeed happened. We follow the reliable sources, not the other way around. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 14:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Can we have at least an introductory paragraph like this one? "Rumble is an online video platform, web hosting, and cloud services business headquartered in Toronto, Ontario, with its U.S. headquarters in Longboat Key, Florida. It was founded in 2013 by Chris Pavlovski, a Macedonian Canadian technology entrepreneur. Rumble's cloud services business hosts Truth Social, and the video platform is popular among American conservative and far-right users. Rumble has been described as "alt-tech"."
- Then the part about Nazis, hate speech, and other concerns can be included in a "Controversies" section of the article. Placing it right at the beginning feels a bit excessive, in my opinion. Also, keep in mind that Ofcom is a UK government agency—I wouldn’t underestimate their influence. Xyron1987 (talk) 09:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- It has one: “BitChute is an alt-tech video hosting service launched by Ray Vahey in January 2017.” I have no doubts about Ofcom’s influence, but that does not change that Wikipedia reflects what is written in secondary, reliable sources, and reflects what has happened rather than trying to predict what may happen. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 13:58, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- How about 'publishing far right content' instead of hosting neo nazis since there's no proof of this? Xyron1987 (talk) 08:20, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- I’m not sure what you mean by no proof, the citations (for example, [1]) are adequate. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 15:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- They are old that's what I mean, we are talking about what the website was not is. Do you think the White House would have a verified channel on a neo nazi site? C'mon this is not stormfront. Please revise neo nazi to far right. Xyron1987 (talk) 04:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- What the White House does or doesn't do is not relevant to this article; if you want changes to the article to be made, you will need to provide actual reliable sources that support your claims. As GW has explained, the Ofcom's non-case says that BitChute has promised to make some changes, but it says nothing about whether those promises have actually been delivered on. Furthermore, it doesn't once mention "neo-Nazis" specifically, so it's certainly not usable as a source for the specific neo-Nazi angle you're going for (as otherwise, it'd require a bucket of WP:SYNTH).
- But even if the website no longer hosts Neo-Nazi content (which, again, [citation needed]), the lede would still be correct:
the service is known for hosting neo-Nazis, harmful conspiracy theories, and hate speech
(emphasis mine). Even if it no longer does, one of the main reasons people know and talk about it is hosting neo-Nazi stuff, as evidenced by the cited sources. To draw a somewhat-flippant analogy, Mark David Chapman hasn't murdered a Beatle in nearly a half-century, but that's still what he's known for. As GW said, if these changes are actually implemented effectively, and if reliable sources start reporting on BitChute as no longer being affiliated with neo-Nazis, and if it gains enough coverage in the future that its neo-Nazi origins become a footnote in its history, then we could consider removing that from the lede. But we're a very long way off of any of that. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:21, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- They are old that's what I mean, we are talking about what the website was not is. Do you think the White House would have a verified channel on a neo nazi site? C'mon this is not stormfront. Please revise neo nazi to far right. Xyron1987 (talk) 04:23, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
- I’m not sure what you mean by no proof, the citations (for example, [1]) are adequate. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 15:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- How about 'publishing far right content' instead of hosting neo nazis since there's no proof of this? Xyron1987 (talk) 08:20, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- It has one: “BitChute is an alt-tech video hosting service launched by Ray Vahey in January 2017.” I have no doubts about Ofcom’s influence, but that does not change that Wikipedia reflects what is written in secondary, reliable sources, and reflects what has happened rather than trying to predict what may happen. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 13:58, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- See WP:NPOV: "representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic." Independent, reliable sources have overwhelmingly discussed Bitchute as home to neo-Nazis and other such content, and so the Wikipedia page reflects that. If Bitchute has indeed changed their platform moderation strategy then perhaps they will eventually become known for something else. However, there has been little in the way of coverage of the site since the Ofcom press release, so it would be premature to suggest that that has indeed happened. We follow the reliable sources, not the other way around. GorillaWarfare (she/her • talk) 14:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC)