3 ms·

On the other hand, it also does a good job of removing what I might call accidental propaganda. Most youtube videos are not even skin deep, running off of one a

On the other hand, it also does a good job of removing what I might call accidental propaganda. Most youtube videos are not even skin deep, running off of one article in the news they read, and some youtube person is going to have almost no real understanding when making a video about Syria for example. By removing the people who are only there to drive clicks and revenues, I can probably get better results when I search for a serious topic. Maybe some topics should be left to pure enthusiasts.

sillysaurus3 9y ago
This is an oversimplification of the issue. Some videos to illustrate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn46t8NksX0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn46t8NksX0 - h3h3 "We're at an Important Crossroad" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03dTJ4nXkXw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03dTJ4nXkXw - 2veritasium "Why YouTube Used to Prefer Quality" In particular, consider the thought experiment presented in the second video: If YouTube's algorithm solely promoted car videos, then car videos would be all that are uploaded to YouTube. The algorithm is the content. Even though it happens to align with what you like right now, the bias should be concerning.
- simias 9y ago
  >If YouTube's algorithm solely promoted car videos, then car videos would be all that are uploaded to YouTube. That's assuming that people only upload videos on Youtube to monetize them. Given that uploading videos is basically free I'm sure there'd be no shortage of non-car videos. Actually if I recall correctly youtube didn't have any monetization for many years when it started? What you'd probably lose is high production value original content, although I suspect that many of those content producers might still break even if they have other ways to monetize their content.
whatshisface 9y ago
Removing accidental propaganda... To leave only intentional, engineered propaganda?

sillysaurus3 9y ago

This is an oversimplification of the issue. Some videos to illustrate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn46t8NksX0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn46t8NksX0 - h3h3 "We're at an Important Crossroad" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03dTJ4nXkXw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03dTJ4nXkXw - 2veritasium "Why YouTube Used to Prefer Quality" In particular, consider the thought experiment presented in the second video: If YouTube's algorithm solely promoted car videos, then car videos would be all that are uploaded to YouTube. The algorithm is the content. Even though it happens to align with what you like right now, the bias should be concerning.

simias 9y ago
>If YouTube's algorithm solely promoted car videos, then car videos would be all that are uploaded to YouTube. That's assuming that people only upload videos on Youtube to monetize them. Given that uploading videos is basically free I'm sure there'd be no shortage of non-car videos. Actually if I recall correctly youtube didn't have any monetization for many years when it started? What you'd probably lose is high production value original content, although I suspect that many of those content producers might still break even if they have other ways to monetize their content.

whatshisface 9y ago

Removing accidental propaganda... To leave only intentional, engineered propaganda?