That is extremely unlikely to be true. The guests don't own the copyright, so they can't leverage that. Also, some of the guests are protesting this on Twitter.
I'm sure the motivation of many book burners of the past was also to save the would-be readers from eternal hell. Possible good motivations don't justify censorship.
You could argue that in this particular case censorship probably won't even be effective. Rogan is seen as a something of a censorship martyr by quite a few people now, Streisand effect and all.
Also, there's the fact that most of the removed episodes have nothing to do with Covid-19.
No, it's not representative of how free speech would look like. "The coven of the witches" problem arises in part because of all the witch-hunting going on.
> every periodical does. I’m not sure what the point of complaining about that is.
That is broadly correct, though not all of them are equally biased. However, journalistic objectivity [1] is something we could demand them to strive for. I'm not sure if the press have always been like this.
> Likewise, it’s not particularly noteworthy that WSJ and Fox News have a conservative bias.
Most of the US mainstream outlets are biased in a particular direction. I've said the before here, but you can see that by taking any reasonable list of major outlets [1], and checking their biases [2][3].
> If we are to get up in arms about something, it should be because they are being deceptive (or worse, publishing false information), not because they are merely biased.
Paltering is also a form of deception, and you could argue that it is quite pervasive and pernicious. I think Mother Jones, and many other outlets, are guilty of that.
I don't think that's the reason. Hanlon's razor is just a heuristic, we shouldn't blindly and naively apply it to everything. I think you can see how biased Mother Jones is by taking the headlines on their front page, and trying to rewrite them as someone attempting to be impartial would.
> I have seen this disingenuous copy-paste objection show up in every thread on this topic on HN
To be fair, your comment is objectively more generic and closer to a "copy-paste objection" than the GP's.
I have no idea how the press were in nineteen umpties, but it seems clear to me that the reporting by Mother Jones is pretty biased, and they have their fair share of polemic-level opinion pieces.
Do you think they would cover the recent removal of To Kill A Mockingbird (which is ironically a book they do mention in the article) from the curriculum by a Washington school board [1] in the same way? I don't think so. I searched their website, and it looks like they haven't covered it at all.
I don't know, but Brendan Eich (Brave's CEO) [1] is pretty active on Twitter, and I think he used to answer the questions people asked. You could try asking him there. Let us know if you get an answer.
Also, I apologize for being a little bit too harsh in my previous comment.
Come on, what kind of clickbait is that? So Brave has an opt-in option to see ads [1], and they have some measures to protect against fraud. They are simply being honest about the fact that using a VPN would increase the chance of being marked as suspicious for the purpose of paying you to see ads.
This is HN, and one might hope we can do better than BuzzFeed. In fact, Brave probably would want you to use a VPN, they sell their own VPN service after all [2].
I changed the title, as the original was misleading and clickbaity: "Elections Canada: 205,000 mail-in ballots were not counted".
The original reporting this is based on is by Blacklock’s Reporter [1] which looks like a better source, but unfortunately it's behind a login/paywall.
PS: I found this older article [2] which covers the same issue. Apparently, if my understanding is correct, this number (~1/6 of the mail-in ballots) is much better than the 2019 election [3]. I guess that is something you could expect. Also, I'm not sure what a cancelled ballot means. Does it include the case when someone simply forgets to return the ballot?
[3]: Ibid. "Elections Canada says there is typically a gap between the number of mail-in ballots that go out and the number that come back every year. In the 2019 federal election, only 55 per cent of the domestic mail-in ballots and 61 per cent of international mail-in ballots were returned on time. The remainder were either returned late or not at all."
It is a technological problem too. Telegram has a much better UI/UX than Signal, and not having end-to-end encryption by default is part of the reason.