5 ms·

This is a little off topic, but I watched a Jordan Peterson video once and now my recommendations are fairly extremely right-wing. I'm center-left and the views

This is a little off topic, but I watched a Jordan Peterson video once and now my recommendations are fairly extremely right-wing. I'm center-left and the views Peterson espouses aren't politically extreme (although I've heard some are pretty bizarre) at 'worst' he is a moderate conservative (I say "worst" only because at the current cultural moment "conservative = bad" is the prevailing meme). So I'm not sure exactly how YouTube works, but it feels to me to be trying very hard to push me in a particular direction. To be clear, I don't think YouTube has a RW political agenda, but perhaps it has an economic interest in pushing people to the fringes (maybe people at the extremes click more ads or something). Or perhaps they have a left-wing agenda and they want me to associate moderate-RW views with extremist views (seems unlikely, but then again lots of prominent media companies are pushing a similar agenda).

rifung 8y ago
> To be clear, I don't think YouTube has a RW political agenda, but perhaps it has an economic interest in pushing people to the fringes (maybe people at the extremes click more ads or something). I think it's simpler than what you're suggesting. They want to make money, and the indirect way they do that is to get people to watch more videos. If most people who watch Jordan Peterson tend to also watch extreme right wing content, and you watch his video, then you will get recommended right wing content, because they think that's what you will want to watch. I work for Google but not on Youtube, opinions are my own.
- weberc2 8y ago
  I considered that, but I can't think of any plausible reason for prominent overlap in viewership of JP's moderate political content and extreme RW content. Maybe Peterson appeals to people who previously thought the only moderate option was quiet deference to progressives? Would be really interesting if this were the case--it might imply that Peterson has a strong moderating effect on RWers and/or that people are being taught a false dichotomy between extreme left and right.
  - rifung 8y ago
    > I considered that, but I can't think of any plausible reason for prominent overlap in viewership of JP's moderate political content and extreme RW content From my understanding, JP is actually pretty connected with conservative/right wing politics. Not so much that he is necessarily right wing himself, I wouldn't know, but that he has a large right wing following. I think they like him for his opposition to political correctness/gender pronouns. His philosophy on masculinity also really appeals to conservatives rebelling against feminism. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson#Academia_and_political_correctness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson#Academia_and_p... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson#Gender_relations_and_masculinity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson#Gender_relatio...
  - nl 8y ago
    It's a recommendation engine. People who like JP also like X. And almost anyone who likes any alt-right video also likes JP, because he provides a veil of respectability for anti-feminist, anti-multicultural views.
belorn 8y ago
> interest in pushing people to the fringes (maybe people at the extremes click more ads or something). This theme has been explored in quite many articles on news and advertisement. It is not that extreme stories get people to click more on ads, but it keep people engaged for longer and looking at more content. More views, more engagement with the publishing site, and more ad impressions. I recall reading that there exist an interesting link between moral outrage and dopamine highs. It basically becomes a drug which publishers see as increased user engagement.

rifung 8y ago

> To be clear, I don't think YouTube has a RW political agenda, but perhaps it has an economic interest in pushing people to the fringes (maybe people at the extremes click more ads or something). I think it's simpler than what you're suggesting. They want to make money, and the indirect way they do that is to get people to watch more videos. If most people who watch Jordan Peterson tend to also watch extreme right wing content, and you watch his video, then you will get recommended right wing content, because they think that's what you will want to watch. I work for Google but not on Youtube, opinions are my own.

weberc2 8y ago
I considered that, but I can't think of any plausible reason for prominent overlap in viewership of JP's moderate political content and extreme RW content. Maybe Peterson appeals to people who previously thought the only moderate option was quiet deference to progressives? Would be really interesting if this were the case--it might imply that Peterson has a strong moderating effect on RWers and/or that people are being taught a false dichotomy between extreme left and right.
- rifung 8y ago
  > I considered that, but I can't think of any plausible reason for prominent overlap in viewership of JP's moderate political content and extreme RW content From my understanding, JP is actually pretty connected with conservative/right wing politics. Not so much that he is necessarily right wing himself, I wouldn't know, but that he has a large right wing following. I think they like him for his opposition to political correctness/gender pronouns. His philosophy on masculinity also really appeals to conservatives rebelling against feminism. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson#Academia_and_political_correctness https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson#Academia_and_p... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson#Gender_relations_and_masculinity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson#Gender_relatio...
- nl 8y ago
  It's a recommendation engine. People who like JP also like X. And almost anyone who likes any alt-right video also likes JP, because he provides a veil of respectability for anti-feminist, anti-multicultural views.

belorn 8y ago

> interest in pushing people to the fringes (maybe people at the extremes click more ads or something). This theme has been explored in quite many articles on news and advertisement. It is not that extreme stories get people to click more on ads, but it keep people engaged for longer and looking at more content. More views, more engagement with the publishing site, and more ad impressions. I recall reading that there exist an interesting link between moral outrage and dopamine highs. It basically becomes a drug which publishers see as increased user engagement.