3 ms·

Publishers have editorial control, platforms do not. That's why you can be one or the other, but not both.

criddell 8y ago
But Google, for example, produces original content on YouTube and YouTube is also a platform for other people doing the same. They are both.
- vetinari 8y ago
  Editorial control is about capability of checking and filtering others' content, not your own. Platforms can also use their own products (ISPs themselves use internet or Amazon also uses AWS). Platforms are shielded by CDA exactly because they do not care about the content that goes through it. The moment you demonstrate that you have the capability and intent to filter, you will get responsible for doing so. So no, they still are not both. By editorializing others' content, the CDA protections are void.
  - criddell 8y ago
    With their YouTube Originals channel and all the other channels they fund, Google is clearly a publisher. You wouldn't claim they have no editorial control over YouTube Originals, right?
    - vetinari 8y ago
      Editorial control over Youtube, not just Youtube Originals. Again, similarly just because some ISPs uses their own internet connection and can manage filter the traffic for internal use, does not mean they are responsible for filtering every connection they provide to customers. Or telcos, they also run some phone subscriptions, but are not responsible for every phone subscription in their network. Because they are platform, even as a user of their own platform they have certain control over their own use.
      - criddell 8y ago
        So I think we are back to where we started. Sometimes Google is a publisher and sometimes Google is a platform.
        vetinari 8y ago
        We are back to where we started only in the sense, that some people still do not understand that these two are mutually exclusive. Once you cross the Rubicon from the platform to the publisher, there is no way back and CDA no longer applies.

But Google, for example, produces original content on YouTube and YouTube is also a platform for other people doing the same. They are both.

vetinari 8y ago
Editorial control is about capability of checking and filtering others' content, not your own. Platforms can also use their own products (ISPs themselves use internet or Amazon also uses AWS). Platforms are shielded by CDA exactly because they do not care about the content that goes through it. The moment you demonstrate that you have the capability and intent to filter, you will get responsible for doing so. So no, they still are not both. By editorializing others' content, the CDA protections are void.
- criddell 8y ago
  With their YouTube Originals channel and all the other channels they fund, Google is clearly a publisher. You wouldn't claim they have no editorial control over YouTube Originals, right?
  - vetinari 8y ago
    Editorial control over Youtube, not just Youtube Originals. Again, similarly just because some ISPs uses their own internet connection and can manage filter the traffic for internal use, does not mean they are responsible for filtering every connection they provide to customers. Or telcos, they also run some phone subscriptions, but are not responsible for every phone subscription in their network. Because they are platform, even as a user of their own platform they have certain control over their own use.
    - criddell 8y ago
      So I think we are back to where we started. Sometimes Google is a publisher and sometimes Google is a platform.
      - vetinari 8y ago
        We are back to where we started only in the sense, that some people still do not understand that these two are mutually exclusive. Once you cross the Rubicon from the platform to the publisher, there is no way back and CDA no longer applies.