A "suggestive but without nudity" scene deemed"unsuitable for miniors" by PAP internet brigade.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3DyWJp-aXU
(note that the flag has since been removed. see footnote below)
Background story:
A week ago, I discovered a youtube video. Since then, that youtuber has done a number of other videos, all of which I enjoy. So, I visit her youtube page quite regularly.
Yesterday, I was on her site when I saw that one of her new videos was flagged as "unsuitable for minors"' viewing. That, of course, got me very curious - I was wondering if she had decided to strip for the camera. Haha!
Apparently, the video is full of images of elderly Singaporean beggars; And nothing else!
I think, it follows from simple logic, that the only kind of persons who would flag such a video as unsuitable for minors under 18 would be sick pap supporters - i.e. my fellow members from Young Pay-And-Pay!
Who else would regard elderly Singaporeans begging in the street as:
(from youtube's flagging terms page:)
1. Graphic sexual activity
"Graphic sexual activity" describes content which contains actual visible or implied sex acts.
2. Nudity
"Nudity" refers to exposed or see-through coverage of areas typically covered by a bathing suit or underwear. Sometimes nudity is allowed on YouTube, depending on the context.
3. Suggestive, but without nudity
"Suggestive" content refers to materials with sexual themes that do not necessarily depict sexual activity or nudity. Sexually suggestive content may not be suitable for all audiences and may include fetish-related content.
4. Shocking or disgusting content
"Shocking or disgusting content" refers to disturbing imagery, such as graphic depictions of violence, accidents or gore, which lack an appropriate context.
5. Promotes hatred or violence against a protected group
Hate speech is content that promotes or encourages hatred or violence toward a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity.
6. Harmful dangerous acts
"Harmful dangerous acts" may include content which is depicts behavior likely to cause serious injury or death to a third party.
When you try to flag a video in youtube, you cannot just click a button and be done with. You have to justify your action by selecting one of the categories stated above.
And so, this is the conclusion we can draw:
PAP internet brigade regards 80 years old Singaporeans begging in the streets as a graphic sexual activity, or nudity, or suggestive but without nudity, or a shocking/disgusting content, or promotes hatred/violence against a protected group, or a harmful dangerous act!
My fellow Young Pay-And-Pay colleauges, I gotta hand it over to you! Even though we are all part of YPAP, you guys are much more imaginative and may I add, perverted, than I!
I, for one, have no sexual interest in 80 yeares old granny. And I certainly do not view sights of them begging as a "graphic sexual activity"!
Footnote:
The "unsuitable for minors" flag has since been removed. I assume the youtuber must have contacted youtube to get it removed? How did she do that? Did she provide youtube the juicy background story that Singapore is a dictatorial regime which officially has something called "PAP internet brigade", whose job is to go onto the internet to censor out speeches and videos which are detrimental to PAP - videos such as "suggestive but without nudity" scenes of elderly Singaporean beggars? I wonder if this has become the butt of the joke among the administrators of youtube!
6 comments:
Well, the flag may be from the P65 group of people who believe that we are a very developed country.
I heard that there is one new MP who said that he did not know that there are poor people in developed countries. He is Michael.
Huh?
> Apparently, the video is full of images of elderly Singaporean beggars; And nothing else!
You are wrong, ypap. Mr. Lee spoke in the video. Maybe his voice is "suggestive but without nudity"! lol
ypap
How to become a member of the internet brigade? How much they pay? I am jobless now and want to apply leh.Evil always pays, especially if you are part of PAP.
But the PAP brigade was right.
Although the word "obscene" is not on the flagging terms, the video is indeed truly OBSCENE!
OBSCENE because it depicts the OBSCENE end results of an OBSCENE system run by OBSCENE people drawing OBSCENE salaries. There you have it.
And why don't you guys who are tech savvy package this properly and email it to every representative in the UN.
I was told that reading and watching too much local mainstream media makes one stupid and blind. I have never been so sure until today.
I don't know about you; but even without watching the video first, I immediately understood that the video is likely to "promotes hatred or violence against a protected group" - and therefore shall be flagged according to YouTube guidelines.
The target of hatred need not be in the video. But isn't it obvious that a great amount of hatred will be generated towards a certain "protected group" (READ "party") by the end of the clip. If you can't feel it, you are really out of touch with public sentiment!
Post a Comment