Uploaded October 2007 | Updated September 2026, 3 weeks ago
This video is in response to Thewinekone's video "Trobulemaker"
youtube.com/watch?v=eaDJZc-mDts
---------------------------------------
The following link contains many stories about the War of the World broadcast. Note the book excerpt from Prof. David L Miller, about 1/3 of the way down, indicates that reports of mass hysteria following the broadcast were exaggerated. Nevertheless, there is not denying that hundreds, and perhaps thousands of people were taken in by the hoax.
members.aol.com/jeff1070/wotw.html
See also:
old-time.com/otrlogs2/wow_mg.html
news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/06/0617_050617_warworlds.html
war-ofthe-worlds.co.uk/war_worlds_orson_welles_mercury.htm
archives.gov/publications/prologue/2003/fall/war-of-worlds.html
---------------------------------------
The following link goes to a lengthy article published in the Federal Communications Law Journal. It gives a detailed analysis of the FCCs reactions to various radio hoaxes.
http://www.law.indiana.edu/fclj/pubs/v52/no2/levine.pdf
Three points are worth noting:
1) Frank McNinch, chairman of the FCC, called in the heads of the three broadcasting networks and expressed concern of the overuse of the newspaper term "flash" in their broadcasts. (The "reports" by the "newscasters" in the War of the Worlds were introduced by the word "FLASH".) The network heads agreed not to use the word "Flash" to announce a news story in the future unless it was being used to introduce a real news story of utmost importance.
2) The day after the broadcast, Senator Clyde L. Herring stated that Welles's drama was proof that radio needed "control by the government." He claimed that he had prepared a bill that would have allowed the FCC to screen and veto every radio program before it was broadcast. Fortunately, he moderated his stance and never actually introduced his bill to Congress, possibly because newspaper editorials were strongly against censorship of the new medium.
3) In 1974, WPRO in Providence Rhode Island broadcasted an updated version of the War of the Worlds with location names more familiar to Providence citizens. It generated over 100 calls to the stations and 80 calls to the police, and the fire department and local telephone company and other radio and TV stations complained that they were overwhelmed with calls about the disaster. This was a much less intense "panic" than exhibited after the original WOW broadcast, but the fact that anyone believed this Halloween eve's broadcast after all these years, despite warnings before and during the broadcast that they were listening to a dramatic production, just proves that there are going to be stupid people in any large enough audience.
-------------------------------------
Renetto made a series of videos expressing disgust at Youtube's apparently arbitrary policy of suspending content providers without providing them with adequate explanations behind their suspensions. Note the anger by this Youtube Partner at the apparently arbitrary manner in which they suspend people without providing them a full explanation as to why they were suspended.
youtube.com/watch?v=58TcrvkxU8g
youtube.com/watch?v=KQXebXAgmGo
youtube.com/watch?v=anjlWzMtm1s
Youtube's behavior of removing videos can be largely explained by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
youtube.com/watch?v=anjlWzMtm1s
The DMCA does not FORCE Youtube to take down any videos, but it guarantees Youtube that they won't be successfully sued for copyright infringement if they promptly take down a video upon receipt of a DMCA complaint. (I said in my video that the DMCA gave Youtube 10 -- 14 days to take down a video. I was mistaken. Youtube has to remove a video promptly. They also have to put the video back up within 10 -- 14 business days if they receive a DMCA counternotice.)
THE DMCA DOES NOT FORCE YOUTUBE TO SUSPEND PEOPLE PERMANANTLY!!!! THAT IS A POLICY DECISION BY YOUTUBE, NOT A REQUIREMENT OF THE DMCA.
Wendy Seltzer is a lawyer and who has worked with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. She is the founder of the Chilling Effects Clearinghouse. In 2003, the Dean of Harvard College stated that that the College would suspend repeat copyright infringers' access to the campus computer network for 1 year in order to gain protection from the DMCA. In her April 18, 2003 blog entry, Seltzer wrote that there is nothing within the DMCA that requires even a 1-year suspension.
wendy.seltzer.org/blog/archives/2003/04/18/even_harvards_dean_misreads_the_dmca_safe_harbor.html
There is absolutely no reason to believe Youtube must suspend people permanently because of copyright violations.
This video is in response to Thewinekone's video "Trobulemaker"
youtube.com/watch?v=eaDJZc-mDts
---------------------------------------
The following link contains many stories about the War of the World broadcast. Note the book excerpt from Prof. David L Miller, about 1/3 of the way down, indicates that reports of mass hysteria following the broadcast were exaggerated. Nevertheless, there is not denying that hundreds, and perhaps thousands of people were taken in by the hoax.
members.aol.com/jeff1070/wotw.html
See also:
old-time.com/otrlogs2/wow_mg.html
news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/06/0617_050617_warworlds.html
war-ofthe-worlds.co.uk/war_worlds_orson_welles_mercury.htm
archives.gov/publications/prologue/2003/fall/war-of-worlds.html
---------------------------------------
The following link goes to a lengthy article published in the Federal Communications Law Journal. It gives a detailed analysis of the FCCs reactions to various radio hoaxes.
http://www.law.indiana.edu/fclj/pubs/v52/no2/levine.pdf
Three points are worth noting:
1) Frank McNinch, chairman of the FCC, called in the heads of the three broadcasting networks and expressed concern of the overuse of the newspaper term "flash" in their broadcasts. (The "reports" by the "newscasters" in the War of the Worlds were introduced by the word "FLASH".) The network heads agreed not to use the word "Flash" to announce a news story in the future unless it was being used to introduce a real news story of utmost importance.
2) The day after the broadcast, Senator Clyde L. Herring stated that Welles's drama was proof that radio needed "control by the government." He claimed that he had prepared a bill that would have allowed the FCC to screen and veto every radio program before it was broadcast. Fortunately, he moderated his stance and never actually introduced his bill to Congress, possibly because newspaper editorials were strongly against censorship of the new medium.
3) In 1974, WPRO in Providence Rhode Island broadcasted an updated version of the War of the Worlds with location names more familiar to Providence citizens. It generated over 100 calls to the stations and 80 calls to the police, and the fire department and local telephone company and other radio and TV stations complained that they were overwhelmed with calls about the disaster. This was a much less intense "panic" than exhibited after the original WOW broadcast, but the fact that anyone believed this Halloween eve's broadcast after all these years, despite warnings before and during the broadcast that they were listening to a dramatic production, just proves that there are going to be stupid people in any large enough audience.
-------------------------------------
Renetto made a series of videos expressing disgust at Youtube's apparently arbitrary policy of suspending content providers without providing them with adequate explanations behind their suspensions. Note the anger by this Youtube Partner at the apparently arbitrary manner in which they suspend people without providing them a full explanation as to why they were suspended.
youtube.com/watch?v=58TcrvkxU8g
youtube.com/watch?v=KQXebXAgmGo
youtube.com/watch?v=anjlWzMtm1s
Youtube's behavior of removing videos can be largely explained by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.
youtube.com/watch?v=anjlWzMtm1s
The DMCA does not FORCE Youtube to take down any videos, but it guarantees Youtube that they won't be successfully sued for copyright infringement if they promptly take down a video upon receipt of a DMCA complaint. (I said in my video that the DMCA gave Youtube 10 -- 14 days to take down a video. I was mistaken. Youtube has to remove a video promptly. They also have to put the video back up within 10 -- 14 business days if they receive a DMCA counternotice.)
THE DMCA DOES NOT FORCE YOUTUBE TO SUSPEND PEOPLE PERMANANTLY!!!! THAT IS A POLICY DECISION BY YOUTUBE, NOT A REQUIREMENT OF THE DMCA.
Wendy Seltzer is a lawyer and who has worked with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. She is the founder of the Chilling Effects Clearinghouse. In 2003, the Dean of Harvard College stated that that the College would suspend repeat copyright infringers' access to the campus computer network for 1 year in order to gain protection from the DMCA. In her April 18, 2003 blog entry, Seltzer wrote that there is nothing within the DMCA that requires even a 1-year suspension.
wendy.seltzer.org/blog/archives/2003/04/18/even_harvards_dean_misreads_the_dmca_safe_harbor.html
There is absolutely no reason to believe Youtube must suspend people permanently because of copyright violations.
