Any platform which has a ‘recommendations’ feature can create avenues for people to explore videos showcasing similar or different political views. I would further argue that people cannot be properly fortified against radical ideologies and unreasonable people online if de-platforming is the strategy. I strongly dislike Alex Jones but feel obliged to defend him against the recent stream of de-platforming. This is not because I support the guy (I can’t even stand to watch him for very long). The thought that big companies have the power to deny services to people because of political beliefs is not only deeply troubling but suggests that political tribalism has become a new kind of religion.
As for the Tim Pool video, I did not set the time marker and do not know why it was set. Tim Pool does not merely assert credibility through disavowing mainstream sources. In fact, as he has said in one recent video, he regularly cites mainstream sources for his analyses. He denies being in videos with some of the people on Lewis’s chart. I am also aware that Pool has expressed opposition towards being put in the center of Lewis’s web. You are correct when you say that the report does not explicitly cite Pool as ‘right’ or ‘alt-right.’ The inclusion of Tim Pool still does not make sense as he is left-libertarian. Do his videos bring up recommendations to right-leaning channels? I’m sure that right-leaning channels are among the recommendations. This is beyond Pool’s power. Additionally, I would argue that people’s political convictions are not so flimsy that they can easily be converted to extremist positions. If there are such people, then merely de-platforming or censorship will not do anything to help them.
I still maintain a skeptical stance toward calls on corporations (or governments) to restrict speech beyond issues related to slander, libel, or direct threats of violence. I also maintain that superficial ideologies (such as those based on any kind of racial supremacy) are better off exposed to real-world opposition in debate. Let such ideological positions be shattered in the public realm.
I do not think Southern is a racist or alt-right (though she is right-wing). I honest have no idea who Warski is. Dave Rubin is a classical liberal host who interviews people of various political backgrounds. I still maintain that the idea these channels normalize radical political viewpoints. Rebecca Lewis demonstrates incompetence or malevolence by grouping classical liberals, conservatives, and libertarians with alt-right extremists. in doing so, she makes her arguments less clear and ends up potentially alienating a greater number of people. Furthermore, de-platforming is quite illiberal. Though Dave Rubin is quite a talented and open-minded interviewer, he does have the major shortcoming of not challenging his guests enough. I do think he needs to be more disagreeable. I have to conclude, after analyzing your fourth paragraph, that this is mere fear-mongering (when you say “Whether they like it or not, their platforms serve as an easy way to normalize and introduce white nationalists and such into the mainstream”). Merely talking to people who hold reprehensible views, such as Spencer, should not be reason enough to de-platform someone or even restrict the particular video. I also stand by my position that censoring such views will make them go underground, likely encourage their growth, and cause them to manifest in strange ways in the future. The fact that members of the radical right (such as Spencer) have a significant following (not all of those who view his work or follow him online necessarily support him) suggest the presence of a problem or series of problems which will not go away if censored by major companies. Moreover, the alt-right does not have anything close to institutional power. The alt-right is a gang of losers whose big event was that pathetic, though rather eerie, gathering in Charlottesville last year. The alt-left (Antifa) are a much bigger threat to peace and stability.
Debating a genocide denier is like debating a creationist. you will likely not change the other’s mind but you can tear ridiculous arguments to pieces with facts.
This is not about YouTube or any company wanting to ‘support’ any person who makes claims of racial superiority. This is about a questionable report which analyzes a wide variety of intellectuals and bloggers under the general heading of ‘Alternative Influence: Broadcasting the Reactionary Right on YouTube.’ I still maintain that this report is a poor attempt at discrediting new media sources as establishment media sources face increasing competition and declining numbers of viewers. Lewis’s report would have more credibility if she focused, with surgical precision, on actual alt-right networks. In fact, she would have been better off focusing on political extremism. Antifa is a bigger threat, generally speaking, than fascism.