3 ms·

The solution is in societal morals and not in tech companies doing the censoring.

kartan 8y ago
I posted this 1 day ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18583017 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18583017) "YouTube, for example, can show advertisements for well known companies in videos about Anti-vaccination, far-right conspiracies, etc. without consequences. Why is that? Because all that happens in the privacy of your own computer. Usually any newspaper that publicly have printed such bullshit in their pages will be dead. Public will react to it. What is different? Facebook, YouTube, etc. are personalized. You are shown what you are interested in without public accountability. Niche radical content gets a lot of views for its own controversial nature. Views and money. Who wants to investigate, hire good writers and expend the money that it takes to write a good article when you can hire some one without ethics for a fraction of the price and get as many or more views as radicalization grows? YouTube, Facebook and others say that they are not responsible of the content they offer. I think that it should be true for things like comments. But for the monetized content they are 100% responsible of incentivizing that radicalization and killing good journalism in the process. " Tech (apps) companies cannot solve so much problems as they think. But, they can solve the problems that they have created.
- Nasrudith 8y ago
  How are they supposed to do that? You can't watch all of youtube. Even all of monetized youtube. As for good journalism it either committed suicide or was killed off by management depending on perspective - either way it was quite a while ago. The actual newspaper conglomerated were doing the same damn thing before there was a Google - just look up a list of old moral panics. Look up Grunge slang hoax - they didn't even call a guy in Seattle to ask if they ever heard anything like the joke article to be sure it wasn't somebody taking the piss - and it was.
B1FF_PSUVM 8y ago
> societal morals Good luck with that. Advertisers figured out they could pound those to a pulp, and they were not wrong. Any sane man of a couple centuries ago is now a leper by modern standards. They don't have us walking on our hands because ... I don't know, perhaps there's no money in it or that did not yet occur to them.
Nasrudith 8y ago
While I strongly oppose the tech company censorship push societal morality is utterly dubious. As in let me know when you find anything worthy of the name. Seriously "moral" society has condoned all sorts of utterly fucked up things while stridently opposing harmless and helpful things for the stupidest reasons.

I posted this 1 day ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18583017 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18583017) "YouTube, for example, can show advertisements for well known companies in videos about Anti-vaccination, far-right conspiracies, etc. without consequences. Why is that? Because all that happens in the privacy of your own computer. Usually any newspaper that publicly have printed such bullshit in their pages will be dead. Public will react to it. What is different? Facebook, YouTube, etc. are personalized. You are shown what you are interested in without public accountability. Niche radical content gets a lot of views for its own controversial nature. Views and money. Who wants to investigate, hire good writers and expend the money that it takes to write a good article when you can hire some one without ethics for a fraction of the price and get as many or more views as radicalization grows? YouTube, Facebook and others say that they are not responsible of the content they offer. I think that it should be true for things like comments. But for the monetized content they are 100% responsible of incentivizing that radicalization and killing good journalism in the process. " Tech (apps) companies cannot solve so much problems as they think. But, they can solve the problems that they have created.

Nasrudith 8y ago
How are they supposed to do that? You can't watch all of youtube. Even all of monetized youtube. As for good journalism it either committed suicide or was killed off by management depending on perspective - either way it was quite a while ago. The actual newspaper conglomerated were doing the same damn thing before there was a Google - just look up a list of old moral panics. Look up Grunge slang hoax - they didn't even call a guy in Seattle to ask if they ever heard anything like the joke article to be sure it wasn't somebody taking the piss - and it was.

B1FF_PSUVM 8y ago

> societal morals Good luck with that. Advertisers figured out they could pound those to a pulp, and they were not wrong. Any sane man of a couple centuries ago is now a leper by modern standards. They don't have us walking on our hands because ... I don't know, perhaps there's no money in it or that did not yet occur to them.

Nasrudith 8y ago

While I strongly oppose the tech company censorship push societal morality is utterly dubious. As in let me know when you find anything worthy of the name. Seriously "moral" society has condoned all sorts of utterly fucked up things while stridently opposing harmless and helpful things for the stupidest reasons.