Whataboutism attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with
hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving the argument. Accusing an organization of bias (i.e. Youtube, FB etc.) and therefore a double standard is the same as charging them with hypocrisy. Both of you are engaging in this and thus whataboutism.
There is simply no equivalent to Alex Jones infowars on the web on the left or on the right. Your attempt to draw an equivalence with The Young Turks is a gross mischaracterization and exaggeration. The kind of hatred and incitement propagated by Alex Jones has had real world consequences. Both Pizzagate and harassment of Sandy Hook families are tangible examples. There is no equivalent I am aware of with The Young Turks.
Both of you seem to be intelligent enough to understand the nuances in the case of Alex Jones. However, despite the fact that you indicate that you do not condone his views or actions, your attempts at drawing false equivalencies comes across as tacit approval. What you are engaging in is moral equivocation i.e. denying that a moral hierarchy can be assessed of two sides in a conflict, or in the actions or tactics of two sides when it clearly can. That is the same process that decent everyday Germans engaged in during the rise of Nazism.
You should both read up on philosopher
Karl Popper's explanation of the 'Paradox of Tolerance'.
"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant."
