5 ms·

It's called selective enforcement.

by asdf21 7y ago

floatingatoll 7y ago
What is?
- cosmotron 7y ago
  asdf21 is implying that your strategy probably won't be effective because YouTube may only enforce this policy selectively (i.e. not on their own parent's content or other powerful entities).
- asdf21 7y ago
  When you "report" videos of large companies, they will likely simply ignore those reports, rendering your outlined tactic futile. Policies like these are almost always selectively enforced.
- calcifer 7y ago
  Reporting their own content doesn't matter, because the rules don't apply to them. Ergo, selective enforcement.
exolymph 7y ago
You can make it a PR issue. Go through reporting and if the videos clearly violate TOS and aren't taken down, point out the double standard to the activist press.
- hrktb 7y ago
  Technically you can. In practice it’s playing the outrage lottery: you can’t complain not winning if you don’t buy into it, but you only have one in a million chance to have your issue blow up to any proportion, and then some more astronomically low chance it leads to anything. I am still thinking about the Vox presenter Carlos Maza who painstakingly documented and published how youtube didn’t enforce its hate speech rules, gathered 20 000 retweets, got an official youtube account reply to assure they’ll look into it. And nothing (well, some more harrasment and hate speech)
  - effie 7y ago
    Do you have a link where this is documented? Reports on this seem quite polarized.
    - hrktb 7y ago
      It seems to be very polarizing yes. Then Steven Crowder's channel has 4 000 000 subscribers, so someone asking youtube to punish the channel is garanteed to have "strong opinions" facing him. This is the original tweet series: https://twitter.com/gaywonk/status/1134263774591037441 https://twitter.com/gaywonk/status/1134263774591037441 The final response from the youtube team: https://twitter.com/gaywonk/status/1136056663927087105 https://twitter.com/gaywonk/status/1136056663927087105
- tenpies 7y ago
  > out the double standard to the activist press. Except the activist press only cares about their side. If you're censoring anything they don't like or critical of them, they will shower you with praise. They will actually cheer at Google to ban more. Just wait until a US President, British PM, or other leader they like is in power - they'll beg Google to merge with the government.

It's called selective enforcement.

by asdf21 7y ago

It's called selective enforcement.

floatingatoll 7y ago

What is?

cosmotron 7y ago
asdf21 is implying that your strategy probably won't be effective because YouTube may only enforce this policy selectively (i.e. not on their own parent's content or other powerful entities).
asdf21 7y ago
When you "report" videos of large companies, they will likely simply ignore those reports, rendering your outlined tactic futile. Policies like these are almost always selectively enforced.
calcifer 7y ago
Reporting their own content doesn't matter, because the rules don't apply to them. Ergo, selective enforcement.

exolymph 7y ago

You can make it a PR issue. Go through reporting and if the videos clearly violate TOS and aren't taken down, point out the double standard to the activist press.

hrktb 7y ago
Technically you can. In practice it’s playing the outrage lottery: you can’t complain not winning if you don’t buy into it, but you only have one in a million chance to have your issue blow up to any proportion, and then some more astronomically low chance it leads to anything. I am still thinking about the Vox presenter Carlos Maza who painstakingly documented and published how youtube didn’t enforce its hate speech rules, gathered 20 000 retweets, got an official youtube account reply to assure they’ll look into it. And nothing (well, some more harrasment and hate speech)
- effie 7y ago
  Do you have a link where this is documented? Reports on this seem quite polarized.
  - hrktb 7y ago
    It seems to be very polarizing yes. Then Steven Crowder's channel has 4 000 000 subscribers, so someone asking youtube to punish the channel is garanteed to have "strong opinions" facing him. This is the original tweet series: https://twitter.com/gaywonk/status/1134263774591037441 https://twitter.com/gaywonk/status/1134263774591037441 The final response from the youtube team: https://twitter.com/gaywonk/status/1136056663927087105 https://twitter.com/gaywonk/status/1136056663927087105
tenpies 7y ago
> out the double standard to the activist press. Except the activist press only cares about their side. If you're censoring anything they don't like or critical of them, they will shower you with praise. They will actually cheer at Google to ban more. Just wait until a US President, British PM, or other leader they like is in power - they'll beg Google to merge with the government.