YouTube going full thought police.

[Powerogue]

It depends on how far they go with implementation but this material has every capability to be "full thought police" as you put it.

[Findlyn]

YouTube/Google isn't an ISP, so Net Neutrality doesn't really apply. But, I do see your concern.

Google is an ISP, just only in some area's. But google is also one of the most influential company's on the planet, and can dictate what you find when you are like the majority and use their search engine.

[Elba]

Saw this on Twitter, hypothetical examples of YouTube's new policy in action:

-SNIP-

Yeah, this is just complete paranoid nonsense. It is really hard to take you guys seriously if you post things like this.

[I Push Buttons]

Nah, his audience are the Rubin / Rogan pretend centrist but actually conservative types.

Guys is a religious nut job who literally!! cries about "post modernism"

Religious nut job? He is a psychologist who investigates the psychological origins of our invention of religion...

[Zmaniac17]

Blockchain alternatives are coming to replace centrally controlled media distribution sites like Youtube. Creators will get paid directly for their content and by pass the middle man. Youtube doesn't know it yet but their model is dead. It's by no means guaranteed to succeed though. So support these alternatives when you see them if you want an open internet.

[I Push Buttons]

Yeah, this is just complete paranoid nonsense. It is really hard to take you guys seriously if you post things like this.

Paranoid nonsense...? It literally says in their release that they are going to do this...

Legitimately says "if you search for controversial things we will redirect you to our curated CreatorsForChange content"...

[melodramocracy]

all you need to do is look at the videos they promote to realize this is completely false. Yesterday there was some stupid video of Miley Cyrus being promoted on their front page trending, the video had been up one day and had 20,000 views. The power of media companies does not come from advertiser revenue, Google makes all of its money in search and probably loses money with youtube. There is a reason why billionaires buy newspapers like the New York Times and Washington Post, that loose money by the truckload.

https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.c...-over-spotify/

I'm curious as to how you think they netted that 9 billion in revenue, if not with advertisers.

[Xisa]

Pretty sure they're just looking for reasons to demonetize more videos.

That being said, they can't win here. If it ever came to light that terrorist groups like ISIS/Al-Qaeda were getting YT money by just barely skirting around the site's rules, the blowback would be massive.

The "free speech at all costs, no matter the consequences" crowd represents minority opinion. Most individuals don't give a shit if private companies censor content posted on their platform.

Most people are not mentally strong enough to handle truly free speech, and the limiting of free speech always leads to abuse, 100% of the time.

[Lokryn]

Nah, his audience are the Rubin / Rogan pretend centrist but actually conservative types.

Guys is a religious nut job who literally!! cries about "post modernism"

Wow, way to be closed-minded. I'm part of a sizeable liberal fan group of Peterson on facebook.

Edit: Sorry for double post.

[Deleted]

I don't have an issue with the policy if it is applied to everyone on the same level. Right now some channels are being ignored all together while some are flagged every single video even though they are news channel.

A news channel talking about rape shouldn't be flagged, yet it happens...hell, some channels videos get flagged automatically before it is even rendered 720p for public view.

[I Push Buttons]

LOL which is all nonsense because those will still be there, and none of those left or right are going to be paid for making content one way or another, and the searcher might have to pay for content themselves by buying a book, or subscribing to access to a library.

It won't though, they said they will hide this content and redirect searches for it. You will pretty much only be able to view it if you follow a direct link to it.

[Berndorf]

Would Google really try to influence how people think and what info is available to them according to some ulterior agenda of their own? Next thing you'll try to tell me is how agencies like the nsa are spying on everyone and using companies like Google or Microsoft to help them do it. You guys are so paranoid.

[Heladys]

I guess it's off to RacistShitWadTube for some people.

[Dr Assbandit]

Criticize islam with facts and data? Removed
Criticize extremist liberals with facts and data? Removed

Make unfounded claims about white males oppressing everyone and being the source of every single woe this planet has ever had with zero factual evidence?
Just fine!

This mainly comes from them trying to de-platform people who don't march to their tune because they don't want any scrutiny of their agenda.

This isn't a problem solely limited to liberals. If you think conservatives don't do the same form of "thought policing" on their own websites then I have a rainbow bridge to Asgard that you might be interested in. Does that make it right when either side does it? Of course not. But maybe you should also start by criticizing those of your own political affiliation before laying the blame solely on one side.

[Deleted]

LOL which is all nonsense because those will still be there, and none of those left or right are going to be paid for making content one way or another, and the searcher might have to pay for content themselves by buying a book, or subscribing to access to a library.

Scenario 1 actually has already been proven to be in effect for a while now..

- - - Updated - - -

It won't though, they said they will hide this content and redirect searches for it. You will pretty much only be able to view it if you follow a direct link to it.

Meanwhile you can easily find porn and videos filled with violence on youtube that have been up for years and despite being reported are still up.

[Elba]

Religious nut job? He is a psychologist who investigates the psychological origins of our invention of religion...

[Blur4stuff]

Seems like the argument is just about where to draw the line. They have to filter and reject content. It would never be appropriate to allow anything and everything that people want to post using the excuse of free speech.

This has to be done to some extent even with political speech because otherwise YT would become a platform for recruitment into hateful ideologies.

[Elba]

Wow, way to be closed-minded. I'm part of a sizeable liberal fan group of Peterson on facebook.

Edit: Sorry for double post.

Classical Liberal I take it.

[Doctor Amadeus]

It won't though, they said they will hide this content and redirect searches for it. You will pretty much only be able to view it if you follow a direct link to it.

Really like you mean when I want batteries for my remote I get pop up ads for Duracell when I normally buy Energizer. Seriously marketing has been on the internet for years and manipulating people to.

One doesn't necessarily mean the other because it COULD. I bet you fucking real money all the shit you just said can be access any number of ways NONE which rely on YouTube or Twitter. The only thing you might be bitching about is effort.

Well good luck trying to buy batteries then, or wait do I have to buy Duracell because that is what comes up?

[Lokryn]

Classical Liberal I take it.

Not specifically, no.