Will Rumble Crumble? The battle of the "alternative" video sharing platforms.

If you haven't yet subscribed to the Gab newsletters i might suggest doing so (how you do that, i don't recall - maybe you have to join first). Gab's CEO, Andrew Torba, puts out some interesting stuff.

Personally, though i'm sure i suffer from the effects of mass psychosis in some areas, religion thankfully isn't one of them. Gab self-describes as being heavily Christian oriented, a bias i can do without, however i find Torba's writings to be quite interesting and truthful.

In the latest issue, Rumble Shows Their True Colors Once Again, Andrew points out the hypocrisy of Rumble, a so-called "free speech" platform.

The Canadian video platform Rumble is once again showing their true colors this week after threatening competitor and actual free speech video hosting platform Odysee with legal action over a tweet. This isn’t the first time the Rumble has taken action that is antithetical to protecting free speech online. As National File reported back in June, Rumble abruptly changed their terms of service to ban “hate speech” and “antisemitism” on the very same day that Donald Trump joined the platform. If that sounds exactly like the same terms of service Big Tech platforms use to censor any and all dissent, that’s because it is.

"Hate speech" and "antisemitism" are of course synonyms for 'anything we and/or our controllers disagree with'.

Rumble very obviously wants to avoid anything controversial. The home page is often comprised largely of meaningless 'cutsie' videos of kittens and puppies and babies laughing, etc.. The bias is further revealed by loading the Editor Picks page which is littered with mind-numbing crap about "celebrities" and howling Huskies, blah blah blah.

Underneath the projected facade however the tone is very different. For example, sorting the videos by 'latest' or 'trending reveals a user base that is largely concerned with politics, election fraud, the non-existent "pandemic" and "vaccines" that have killed and seriously injured tens of millions.

Rumbles' attack on Odysee appears to be nothing more than an attempt to eliminate its competition, perhaps by conducting a war of attrition.

I had the chance to speak with Odysee CEO Julian Chandra who had this to say about the ordeal:

I used to have a lot of respect for Rumble’s supposed mission. Their course of action here exemplifies what their actual priorities and attitudes are concerning open discussion and speech. They’re threatening to sue over a tweet! If they truly believed in open discussion and debate as they have claimed all this time, they should have replied on Twitter.

Like ThemTube (aka YouTube), Rumble is obviously not a free speech platform and though Andrew describes BitChute as an advocate for free speech, he is incorrect in my view. BitChute has in fact kicked people off the platform which do not appear to have violated its ToS.

These so-called "alternatives" to YouTube are proving to be little more than copies. The future is distributed, peer-to-peer platforms that are truly censorship resistant, not centralized, corporate run platforms that will always be forced to toe a line, and this includes Gab. Anyone who is working on new social platforms that aren't distributed are wasting their time in my opinion.

2 thoughts on “Will Rumble Crumble? The battle of the "alternative" video sharing platforms.”

  1. An almost complete control over major organs of mass-distributed media, combined with their censorship of our smaller opposing voices and platforms, no matter the relative disparities in national and global reach between them and ours, gives Jewry an universal leftist control. The leftist jews use that in ways which are very different from the ways desired by the vast majority of the Americans and European people in our own countries. It enables their controls over finance and the Central Banks and many other often illicit areas, and methods, to be used for their benefit and always in ways at odds with our own.

    On a related subject, this article is recommended.

    “We have reached a stage in Liberalism where it has turned its back on some of its older ideas. Ideas like personal liberty and autonomy. Now it believes that we all must believe the same things that they do. To be fair they have always believed that, but in the past they also believed that in time everyone would agree with them. Now they have accepted that not everyone will agree with them, which means that they now need to enforce conformity, either by telling people what to believe or through fear.

    The days when you could live a life with little to no interference from politics are over. Even if you submit you will still never escape their politics. Because they believe that they are near the end of their political objectives, they believe that not only are they winning but that they have won…for all time. But silly people keep getting in the way, people like you and I, people who aren’t on board with their ideas. Which means that they cannot let us rest, they must destroy the last opposition to their plans, the only small resistance to their final victory.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *