YouTube to Remove Thousands of Videos Pushing Extreme Views

[Dorian Breh]

are they going after PragerU or will I continue to see advertisements before YouTube videos explaining why white people are the truly oppressed race?

 

[Dorian Breh]

Not really.

If you didn't want the private company to do this shyt then you shouldn't have entrusted the private company not to be beholden to the almighty dollar rather than any speech protections.

Should have been advocating for google to be nationalized rather than for genocide Not my issue that these bigots were the short sighted ones who couldn't realize that any platform that exists with the necessary profit motive would eventually cast them aside once they no longer provided a positive income.

Quality post

YouTube can censor whatever the fukk it wants and can post effectively whatever it wants as long as it navigates the whole "inciting violence issue"

While "nationalizing Google" feels a little insane, anyone paying attention can see the correlation of our national backslide into ignorance with Google replacing it's information-based ranking metrics (does this search result answer the search question?) with ad based ranking metrics (which search results will generate the most revenue)

A less radical solution would be to ENFORCE ANTIMONOPOLY LAWS against these a$$holes.

Or maybe that would be more radical at this point, holding a company accountable

Technology industry set up so as a online video consumer or an online video publisher you have no choice but YouTube. They buy out and shelf any competition and then they shelf innovators with "don't work in tech for three years" buyout contracts.

If there were legitimate YouTube alternatives (this would require innovators to create better video delivery tech - something they have no reason to work on right now) then people could "vote with their clicks" against platforms that won't stop publishing Neo Nazis despite uproar.

If the free market is to solve issues like this, it must be allowed to. Word to @DEAD7 ...

 

[AnonymityX1000]

Then I don't understand your point. If you think youtube should be a private corporation then this is a natural end point of that, they choose money over any ideals of expression every time.

This is one of the rare times where it is a binary choice, either they deplatform these people in the name of chasing money and risk deplatforming non-nazi's for the same reasons, or they're nationalized and thus a government entity where that cannot occur.

I'm not saying Google isn't allowed to do it. I'm saying they are being short-sighted in their strategy. In the long run it would be better that they can say we stood up for people's freedom of speech over money and be able to point to incidents of such in future advertising.
And while I think nationalizing is too extreme I am also not a fan of the corporation and the idea the only reason any business exists is to, "increase share holder value". But you can subvert that by breaking Google up and having companies be sole proprietorships, partnerships, Limited Liability partnerships, etc. Nationalizing is unnecessary.

 

[DonKnock]

Man after reading about the right wing e-ghetto equivalent of twitter gab,i cant even imagine what kind of sick shyt such platform would be.

They will probably all just migrate to somewhere like that, somewhere that already exists. I doubt any of these weirdos seriously want to do the legwork to develop their own platform.

 

[Savvir]

In the long run it would be better that they can say we stood up for people's freedom of speech over money and be able to point to incidents of such in future advertising..

the advertisers themselves want this change...
their bread and butter is being cut off... who are they gonna make money off of if they lose advertisers?

 

[AnonymityX1000]

the advertisers themselves want this change...
their bread and butter is being cut off... who are they gonna make money off of if they lose advertisers?

That's why I said I'm not with the corporate mantra, increase share holder value no matter what. If that is removed a responsible owner can take a stand and say we're not gonna make as much this quarter/year as last to be principled. I think the outcry is kinda fake people may say they are offended by some content but is there a mass boycott of YouTube afoot? I don't think so. It's reactionary and short sighted by advertisers and when they are no longer using YouTube as a platform to advertise it will hit their bottom line. And guess what? They will go back despite the complaints they get.

 

[Wink Beaufield]

It's a starting point. Big tech needs to address white nationalism and fake news head on and be held liable if they fail to meet standards. It's negatively impacting society and making life for minority groups more dangerous.

Problem is that there's a bunch of these libertarian/right wing cacs posted up in these tech companies that embrace it. Just take one good look at reddit and The_Donald subreddit that the owners of that site refuse to remove despite that place being a breeding ground for these white supremacists.

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

Remember the internet before YouTube? People hosted their own videos on their own sites. Such barbarity. How did we survive?

 

[88m3]

Be short sighted brehs.

lower learning

 

[AnonymityX1000]

lower learning

Good counter point . . . wait no it isn't. lol

 

[Dorian Breh]

Remember the internet before YouTube? People hosted their own videos on their own sites. Such barbarity. How did we survive?

Eh not the best argument here. Most content creators could not afford to self host.

If the Alphabet monopoly was disassembled they wouldn't have the scale to hold the server farms they do.

In fact the server farms themselves would become standalone companies. Which could then offer distributed hosting services to content creators, which would allow them to affordably self host.

 

[Dorian Breh]

But you can subvert that by breaking Google up and having companies be sole proprietorships, partnerships, Limited Liability partnerships, etc.

This

Right now Alphabet is doing what makes sense for an oligopolistic company seeking to maximize short term stockholder value. It doesn't make sense from a moral perspective or even a long term profitability perspective but from a short term stock value perspective they are doing the right thing.

Distribute Alphabets assets into a series of private and public companies and those companies don't have the scale to engage in anti-competitive behavior (shelfing good products) or behavior that is abusive to their customers who have no/limited choice (disabling adblock on Chrome)

 

[Savvir]

That's why I said I'm not with the corporate mantra, increase share holder value no matter what. If that is removed a responsible owner can take a stand and say we're not gonna make as much this quarter/year as last to be principled. I think the outcry is kinda fake people may say they are offended by some content but is there a mass boycott of YouTube afoot? I don't think so. It's reactionary and short sighted by advertisers and when they are no longer using YouTube as a platform to advertise it will hit their bottom line. And guess what? They will go back despite the complaints they get.

1. the boycott is of the products of the advertiser... the advertiser puts pressure on youtube... youtube changes policy.....ie. the consumer pressured the platform to change

2. how would an advertiser lose money when they move on from youtube?

 

[saturn7]

Black youtubers have to be careful or they will get caught up in the dragnet.

You gotta be careful with the "it was the Jews" rhetoric or "fukk the fa66ots". Plus any talk of violent revolt will get you on the B.I.E. list.

 

[AnonymityX1000]

1. the boycott is of the products of the advertiser... the advertiser puts pressure on youtube... youtube changes policy.....ie. the consumer pressured the platform to change

2. how would an advertiser lose money when they move on from youtube?

1. If it wasn't a corporation YouTube could tell advertisers kick rocks we are a free speech platform. They may lose $ in the short term but win credibility and loyal customers in the long-term. It would be better strategically for them.
2. Why do they advertise on YouTube in the first place? I'm sure it brings them customers or they wouldn't do it right? So if they stop advertising on the platform they will lose customers going forward. That's the point of advertising right? To get new customers/increase revenue.