this post was submitted on 05 Nov 2025
1126 points (98.9% liked)

Microblog Memes

9606 readers
1818 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Pre-internet there was a certain amount of natural limit on how much bullshit one could spread, because you had to print physical newspapers and find distributors, which meant that you had to have a name and a business address people could find you at.

With 2000s Internet this limiter was removed, but counterbalanced by everyone being able to present their own side for the marketplace of ideas.

Now in 2025 we’re in the worst of both worlds, where a tiny number of trillion-dollar companies control 98% of Internet traffic and are making it clear that they have no qualms abusing that power to shape public discourse.

[–] Samskara@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

You can still make your own website and publish whatever you like (local laws may apply).

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Only in the same way that you could always write your own newsletter and hand it out in the street. I feel like you’re wilfully missing the point there.

[–] Samskara@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Big platforms have a lot of power. They need to control the content published for reasons ranging from following laws to pleasing advertisers. These decisions always have political implications.

[–] Tangent5280@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Yeah, the point is these fucks shouldn't have ever been allowed to be this big in the first plar.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 186 points 4 days ago

There is no safety on corporate media. This is why we built the fediverse.

[–] 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com 42 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If you've been on the internet for a decade or two and can't find news you clearly remember that happened about the big corp, tech or the government, you know these ghouls work together to shape a narrative. They scrub the internet clean of it.

These companies (big tech and news corps) being a monopolies isn't a coincidence, authoritarian governments like it when they have direct access to narrative control.

Needless to say, archive everything you think could disappear, in multiple places, and possibly in regions of their geopolitical rivals.

[–] Formfiller@lemmy.world 9 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Sometimes it might be getting scrubbed. Sometimes it just gets buried under other bullshit. I've had to run the same few keywords in different combos to eventually find the article I was looking for because so many other things with the same keywords happened since. The real thing that hampers this is how Google/youtube removed search by year ranges.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 1 points 2 days ago

some channel i was following was under all that, it was totally buried by yt, because they are loudmouths, i used to followed this channel that jokes about news, but they turn a little to magatty over the pandemic for peoples taste, and i had fun wathching thier downfall which was totally preventable on the main sub(which the channel owners was so afraid they tried take the subreddit talking about them)

[–] Soup@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

The fuck does Google even get out of this? At some point I really just do not understand why people are so aggressively supporting Israel’s genocide. Like, the fervor behind their support is crazy for all people who aren’t directly responsible for creating the problem and who could so easily just not support this shit.

I know there’s money involved but this is ridiculous.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

money, MOSSAD/IDF paid google millions to spread propaganda ads, and recently israeli signed a deal with google for its AI services(1.2bn), and also prevent other nations that requests data from said ai services when accusing IDF soldiers. googles video AI is very useful making alot of propaganda, the ones that been showing up on shorts alot.

[–] sk1nnym1ke@piefed.social 54 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Can someone let that reporter know that PeerTube and other YouTube alternatives already exist.

Yes there are less viewers comparing to YouTube but at least the content willl be not removed.

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 22 points 4 days ago

Content like that should definitely go on multiple platforms. Ironically the right is much better at this, cause they are used to getting deplatformed.

[–] dil@lemmy.zip 7 points 4 days ago (1 children)

they could even host it themselves on their own hardware ensuring it stays up

[–] ieGod@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 days ago

This really isn't a viable long term solution for most individuals.

[–] Chozo@fedia.io 64 points 4 days ago (2 children)

No community guidelines violated

soldiers shooting civilians, including children

I mean, it's right there. YouTube ain't LiveLeak.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 75 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Coverage of the Tienanmen Square Massacre is on YouTube and includes exactly this.

Hell, it's practically a meme to shout "Nobody in China knows about Tienanmen Square!" at the villainous Lemmy Tankies, precisely because the Chinese government has a policy of taking down media coverage while the US media proudly reproduces it at every opportunity.

Why would YouTube, a company that has repeatedly expressed its commitment to breaking down the barriers of government censorship and oppression, suddenly decide it needs to censor a state-sanctioned massacre of civilians? What would lead us to conclude that the genocide in Gaza should be treated differently than the Tienanmen Square massacre?

[–] GlitchyDigiBun@lemmy.world 15 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I wonder if we could pressure the BBC or PBS into pushing these videos to force Google/Israel to do this even more blatantly.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago

Not under the current Zionist administrations

[–] 87Six@lemmy.zip 9 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

repeatedly expressed its commitment to breaking down the barriers of government censorship

That was only and will only ever be done when it's in favor of whatever government reigns over the company.

Displaying the Tiananmen Square Massacre is in line with the USA gov. Displaying Israeli crimes is not.

Don't be naive. Youtube and Google don't give half a shit to go against censorship.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 10 points 4 days ago

Don’t be naive.

Hardly naive. Just pointing out the obvious.

YouTube clearly has no problem hosting snuff films with the correct political valence.

[–] mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 10 points 4 days ago

the post says coverage of. was actual video of the acts shown?

[–] frankiehollywood@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 days ago

Boycott YouTube…

[–] Mrkawfee@feddit.uk 12 points 3 days ago

The Nazis also tried to cover up evidence of their genocide

[–] Reygle@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

Google's slogan 15 years ago
Don't be Evil

Google's slogan today
Do~~n't be~~ Evil

[–] Fleur_@aussie.zone 25 points 4 days ago

We really live in a world where "YouTube took down my warcrime videos" is bigger news than "there are warcrimes being committed"

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 25 points 4 days ago

google is waaaaaaaaay beyond "don't be evil". Right now, for them any kind of statement is just a temporary transportation between their position and more tech monopoly.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 15 points 4 days ago

LiveLeak was killed for a reason. You might not like what it was, but it would have been fine with hosting these things.

[–] DandomRude@lemmy.world 24 points 4 days ago

This is why the world is so terrible: centralization of capital and thus also attention in the hands of unscrupulous monsters.

In Western countries, we may convince ourselves that we are better than the neglected Third World countries because of all our technology. That is not the case—in fact, the opposite is true, because our inhumane rulers have incomparably more power.

[–] ceenote@lemmy.world 20 points 4 days ago (6 children)

I have to wonder: did they seriously mean it when they made "don't be evil" their company motto way back in the day? I'd be open to the idea that they were sincere at the time and then had their brains broken and their souls corroded by extreme wealth.

Or, maybe they were being dishonest even back then, and that mercenary attitude is what you need to succeed in Corporate America.

[–] TheJesusaurus@piefed.ca 17 points 4 days ago

It's difficult to describe the world in the pre-social media age. There was a time when Google was just a cool software company building cool things, and the don't be evil motto was probably genuine.

Software used to be an thing that you would buy and use if you needed it. It came on a disk. It wasn't this ever pervasive network of always on tools living in our homes and devices working to cultivate the ultimate consumer unit

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 9 points 4 days ago

did they seriously mean it when they made “don’t be evil” their company motto way back in the day?

When they weren't raking in tens of billions of dollars in government surveillance contracts and state-sponsored media ad buys? Probably.

But Google is under completely different management in 2025 relative to what it had at the outset in 1998. Perhaps the company's commitment to "Don't Be Evil" was violated the day they IPO'd. But Larry Page and Sergey Brin aren't in the driver's seats anymore. They sold their souls to join the oligarchy. Perhaps they assumed they could do more with an infinite line of credit than a rising star social media company. Or perhaps Google simply wouldn't be allowed as the global leader in search without spreading its cheeks and admitting corrupt bureaucracies to puppet it from below.

[–] ayyy@sh.itjust.works 6 points 4 days ago

There was a time in the early 2000’s when tech companies got their customers by being better than the alternatives instead of just being obscenely wealthy and buying out all competition.

They removed the old motto from everywhere official many years ago. Don't be evil... Until you get enough market share that you don't have to care anymore.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] carpelbridgesyndrome@sh.itjust.works 15 points 4 days ago (2 children)

In fairness they do this with ISIS videos too. It's hard to preserve warcrimes evidence that gets posted to social media no matter who committed it as every platform just deletes it. We need government policy here

[–] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 8 points 4 days ago (2 children)

I never had "wished we had a warcrimestube.com" on my 2025 disaster bingo, but here we are.

[–] FishFace@piefed.social 8 points 4 days ago

It was called liveleaks and it shut down.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today 16 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] IndustryStandard@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago

Today Palestine. Tomorrow us.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago
[–] Cyberflunk@lemmy.world 2 points 4 days ago

was.. he using youtube as a backup?! like, just reupload, or ipfs, torrent, like.. there are ways to male this NEVER GO AWAY

load more comments
view more: next ›