5 ms·
Yeah, it's hard to get this right, and while they've been overly aggressive on copyright claims for a while, I'm glad that they're finally expanding this hardli
by chiaro 9y ago
Yeah, it's hard to get this right, and while they've been overly aggressive on copyright claims for a while, I'm glad that they're finally expanding this hardline stance against extremist content too. Though I'm not surprised it took literally funding Hezbollah (in contravention of UN SCR 2178 I might add) for them to take a look at what their monetisation schemes were enabling. A lot more to go though. When opening an incognito tab and searching something as innocuous as "feminist" gives the results it does, it's not hard to see youtube as being one of the foremost contributors to extremism, especially in kids. Real change won't happen until flagged videos get penalised in recommendations and search results too.
- eighthnate 9y ago> Though I'm not surprised it took literally funding Hezbollah (in contravention of UN SCR 2178 I might add) for them to take a look at what their monetisation schemes were enabling. Fine. Google should demonetize the videos or channels, but they shouldn't take down the channels altogether. > searching something as innocuous as "feminist" gives the results it does What's innocuous about feminist? > it's not hard to see youtube as being one of the foremost contributors to extremism That's what extremists say. That's why lgbt subs are demonetized. > especially in kids. I always get suspicious when pretty bring up "kids" or exploit "kids" to support an agenda. > Real change won't happen until flagged videos get penalised in recommendations and search results too. So you are advocating google censor?
- pjc50 9y agoGoogle always already censor; you've never been allowed "porn" on Youtube from day 1.
- averagewall 9y agoExtremism is still just a political viewpoint. It's not inherently more wrong than the others. You're saying Google should impose popular US culture and politics on the world. Including taking sides in conflicts between other countries. It's pretty arbitrary and could easily be wrong. If you're worried about kids, better ban violent movies, video games, the news, and angry music. No, people have tried "think of the children" before but the children turned out fine.
- chiaro 9y agoExtremism is political, but it can't be reduced to a simple difference in viewpoints. Cultural/moral relativism, beyond being a bit of a dead end philosophically, can certainly result in an inaction that opens the doors to political degeneration, anti-social behaviour, and terrorism. As for other forms of media, we do prevent kids from accessing age-inappropriate stuff, more or less in line with developmental psych research [see: Huesmann, Moise-Titus, Podolski, & Eron (2003)]. YouTube is the odd man out here. The handwringing apologia over the appropriateness of a child entertainer using ethnic slurs would be laughable in any other medium. Google has famously taken a stance on not being evil. It'd somewhat undermine this goal if it were unable to determine what evil is, and isn't.
- Testerkasdl 9y ago> Google has famously taken a stance on not being evil. They changed this policy when they got into the business of telling people what to think and control opinions.
- chiaro 9y agoAnyone that writes code connecting a query to some media content is in "the business of telling people what to think and control opinions" whether they like it or not. The concern is doing so responsibly.
- kevinh 9y agoGoogle's motto is still "Don't be evil". You may be confusing it with Alphabet's motto, which is "Do the right thing".
- talmand 9y agoRegardless, both are still failing.
- pjc50 9y ago> funding Hezbollah Do we have a list of what Google considers to be a banned terrorist group for purposes of defunding?
- chiaro 9y agoThis wouldn't be a bad place to start. https://scsanctions.un.org/consolidated/ https://scsanctions.un.org/consolidated/
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]