4 ms·

That would be a nice and believable if Google wasn't a major investor in Clinton and Schmidt wasn't balls deep in the Clinton machine http://www.politico.com/b

• helthanatos 10y ago
  There is a reason Google came out with YouTube heroes just a little bit ago. https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7124236?hl=en https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7124236?hl=en They changed their monetization terms so youtubers are easier to censor https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/97527?hl=en https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/97527?hl=en I see many more leftist ads on YouTube than right. Even though Google should know I'm not leftist by now, they keep advertising it to me. I watched many trolling videos and an ad about Evan Bayh come up 30/40 videos - the other 10 being Toyota ads. If Google is going to censor conservative videos, they should at least let me opt out of the leftist ads. Or any political ads.
  • voxic11 10y ago
    How is this censorship? As I understand it they just remove ads from videos that their advertisers don't want to be associated with, they don't remove the video, if anything it makes the video better because now it doesn't have ads.
    • jjawssd 10y ago
      Just look at the downvotes assaulting your post's parent and grandparent
    • emp_zealoth 10y ago
      And the creators doen't get paid and are heavily disincentivised from posting anything that might be worth watching. Not removing the video outright doesn't mean everything is fine... Disclaimer: I literally hate anyone who is a conservative/ far right. Yet i stand by their right to take part in the discussion, because muffling them makes everything worse
      • dragonwriter 10y ago
        Free speech doesn't mean you are entitled to have your speech subsidized by other private actors.
  • dragonwriter 10y ago
    > If Google is going to censor conservative videos, they should at least let me opt out of the leftist ads. Or any political ads. You can opt out of ads, entirely, which seems to meet your needs. Of course, it's not free, but opting out of advertising, either entirely or any subset, has a cost to Google, so that makes sense.
    • helthanatos 10y ago
      If they are going to discourage providing content I may enjoy, they should also provide a free means of opting out of ads I hate watching. The platform wouldn't have grown to the size it has if it always had these advertising rules. Why can't they make a deal with certain advertisers for the content that is now offensive or whatever they label it as. There are certainly advertiserers that wouldn't mind being advertised on those sorts of videos. When your company grows in size (especially when accelerated by government deals) you have a duty to not censor what you might have when you were small. I would understand if they had always had their current terms, but by now, they shouldn't be changing terms. Opting out of political ads shouldn't have a cost to Google because they could replace the ad with something else. But Google seems to really want to show the world "don't be evil" was always meant to be ironic. They announced the other day they would start attaching your name to advertising preferences - something they said they'd never do. How can we trust Google won't continue to change things that shouldn't be? From a business sense, it makes sense to take part in government corruption, but the fact that it is a good thing to a company should be alarming. I could always use an adblocker, but I prefer to support creators to spiting Google.