There are multiple people dying in the video. Car and people walking bottom right are engulfed by the wave.

Oh, my error.
Well, should I pull it?
I didn't see that on the mobile (small screen) I was using originally, but yes, on my laptop, there it is.

We can always ask @lucky760 what he thinks. Lucky what say you?

Yeah, this is pretty clear-cut given that as @wtfcaniuse pointed out, there are people there in the video, so this does fall under the Sift's definition of snuff.

For the sake of discussion, if there weren't, this wouldn't feel like snuff except for the title, but that by itself wouldn't be enough to fit into our definition of snuff.

Snuff is murder. Snuff films are murder for entertainment with the purpose of $$.

Youtube George C Scott Hardcore

So basically, for people who want to fap to death.

See #3 https://videosift.com/faq#posting_guidelines

I however think removal of a video like this is a bit much (personal opinion).

VideoSift blurs the definition of "snuff" for whatever reason. Snuff is murder. Dying in a car "accident" is not snuff, murder.

I could put a slow motion close up video of ISIS shooting someone in the head and make it a documentary but I doubt it would stay up very long. And yes, that is a real video.

Recently there was a video of two young women who were beheaded in Morocco. That video will stay with you for a long time.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/29/world/man-arrested-morocco-scandinavian-tourist-deaths/index.html

This was a recording of a homicide that was sent to the families of the victims. Had they distributed it to be sold as entertainment that would make it a snuff film.

I had to look very hard to find the people in this video. It's sad but it is not gore or murder.

I also doubt someone created the landslide in an attempt to kill people and film it for the sole purpose of selling it to those that buy it just to make them breath heavy.

Maybe we should mark it NSFW? I am getting annoyed with these instant replays.

Videosift has it's own specific definition of what it considers inappropriate snuff. That definition may not be the dictionary or your personal definition, but it's the one that counts, and Lucky's interpretation is the final word when there's a question.

I thought this falls under the "incidental portion of an informative news report or documentary" exception since it showed in detail how the dam failed, but what I think doesn't really matter.....also I can't see the people at all on my tablet.

Yep. I got all that. Just sayin'.

All that aside you can imagine the horror of the people running from it vain. The person in the car may have had a slim chance if they were found soon enough. I would have been blowing the horn.

I think we allowed tsunami videos where we know that people are dying on screen but we don't have a zoomed in perspective to their deaths. Like we know there is no way they could have lived, but if we want to get Schrodinger about it we can't actually 'see' them die.

To me death in a video would be unacceptable if you were to see the actual death and it didn't serve an educational purpose, such as exposing an illegal shooting or something else of equivalent nature.

I voted it up. If they had zoomed into a section and showed people's bodies flying or getting crushed I probably wouldn't have voted or I would have called it snuff.

It could be argued the builders are guilty of criminally negligent homicide.








Just sayin'

It could also be argued that death, whether natural, accidental or by design is inevitable and no one can be guilty.

why do they build these dams on top of hills? I don't get it

Because transporting the toxic waste to a lower altitude costs money. It's pure greed, nothing more.

Actually, it looks like there are people on the dam itself. If you look center/right on the hill, it appears there are multiple figures starting to run when it breaks.

*news

110 Dead; Search Continues for 238 Missing

Related artice: https://weather.com/news/news/2019-01-25-brazilian-mining-dam-collapses-vale-sa

A similar accident happened with the same company in 2015:

http://www.mining.com/vale-several-years-to-recover-from-brazil-mine-disaster/

*worldaffairs

Adding video to channels (News, Worldaffairs) - requested by notarobot.

I had not known of the full 2015 story; it makes this doubly horrifying.

I could be wrong but I think those moving dots are livestock.

Pretty sure those are trees or shrubs, I can't see anything that is obviously a person on the dam wall. They move a lot quicker than the people near the bottom and they seem far too big. They might be cattle or something as Dandyman suggested but I don't think they're people. Impossible to say for sure.

I don't mean to be callous but it wasn't until I noticed the people and the car that I was able to get an idea of the scale of the collapse. The trees and buildings don't really give a sense of scale like the people did.

R.I.P.