12 ms·
Amazon Prime video gives amateur how-to’s, conspiracy theories a stage
- robsinatra 7y agoI'm not vaccinating my children because of a video I watched on Amazon Prime created by someone with a lot of confidence and a tone of authority
- RandomTisk 7y agoCensor them! Off with their heads!
- verelo 7y agoAny non-paywall link out there?
- ihuman 7y agoOpen the "web" link in private mode, then click the article.
- verelo 7y agoI might be misunderstanding, when i open the link in private mode it behaves the same as it does in non-private.
- misterprime 7y agoOn Firefox and Chrome the paywall is in full force in private mode. Not just you. I'm not sure if disabling javascript still works. It used to. Also, pasting the link into archive.is used to work, but I think that hole got plugged some months ago as well. [checking] Oh wait no, someone got it to work. Here: http://archive.is/1pzuJ http://archive.is/1pzuJ
- verelo 7y agoExcellent, thank you! I didn't realize this was possible, appreciate you taking the time to educate me.
- ihuman 7y agoIn HN, there is a link labeled “web” under the title. Open that link in private mode, then click the wsj link.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- pjkundert 7y agoI, for one, welcome our new government overlords. Me and my family feel completely incapable of judging the truth or falsehood of claims based on evidence and testing hypotheses.
- marketingfool 7y agoAs corrupt and inefficient as governments are, they seem to win wars and force vaccination. But they also extremely inefficient, murder their own people and intentionally hide their corruption and mistakes. I'm not sure what is best. Maybe middle of the road.
- SketchySeaBeast 7y agoI'm not saying the government is always right, but are you saying you are? Have you tested the hypothesis that the earth is round? That we landed on the moon? Where does your line between self-evident and requiring testing lay?
- pjkundert 7y agoAdmitting ignorance until proof is presented isn’t a bad state. The problem isn’t being ignorant; it’s being certain of things that turn out not to be true. Unfortunately, this appears to be most of what people have been led to believe.
- brenden2 7y agoTo be fair, Netflix also has a bunch of conspiracy theory shows in the "documentary" section.
- jandrese 7y agoFor example, "Behind the Curve" about Flat Earth Proponents.
- chasd00 7y agoI blame Michael Moore for destroying the definition of the Documentary genre.
- SkyBelow 7y agoIt is far smaller a stage than an open internet has given people, some of whom use it for far worse things than either Amateur How-To's or Conspiracy Theories. The solution should be to education society, not lock down information flow to protect society. For kids it is a bit different, but that's on the parents to protect their child and no amount of technology is going to fully counteract neglectful parenting.
- majormajor 7y ago> For kids it is a bit different, but that's on the parents to protect their child and no amount of technology is going to fully counteract neglectful parenting. This is a bit harsh and naive. Given how easily it is to access the wide open internet these days, the amount of vigilance on the part of parents to avoid being "neglectful" like that is greatly increased. And that has a lot of negative side effects.
- ineedasername 7y agoYes, as a parent of multiple kids, it's been extremely difficult to keep tabs and set boundaries on this sort of thing that both keeps my kids from awful content and doesn't make them feel we're suffocating them. I was thrilled when I was able to take away my child's unfettered YouTube access, which I had to constantly monitor and curate, in favor of YouTube kids which has 99.99% of the time presented appropriate content. Though now my oldest is aging out of that walled garden, and we're back to stricter monitoring. It's hard. I want my son to be able to watch folks playing games he likes, get tips & strategies etc., but some of the language used... it's not great. He's old enough now that we can let him be exposed to it and use it as an opportunity to teach. Other things are much more subtle & subversive than mere foul or sexually suggestive language though. Something like "f--- those carebear wuss players that help all the triggered snowflakes that want everything handed to them" I mean, even if you agreed with some of socio-political themes this suggests, the particular language used is one of social division, derision, and disdain. Not "virtues" I'd like to instill in my kids.
- SkyBelow 7y ago>This is a bit harsh and naive. I would call it more fatalistic than naive. Even if we completely ignore cases related to technology we will find an overwhelming number of instances of children being harmed by neglectful parenting. Even if we ignored neglect and focused on active forms of child abuse, the numbers are horrendous. This is not a problem caused by technology nor one that can be fixed by limits placed on technology. I fear too strong a focus on specific issues like kids having access to an unfiltered google when the harms of neglectful parents are far greater, and when we have decided that parental freedoms are worth the trade off.
- proximitysauce 7y agoWhen the media and establishment are repeatedly caught misleading the public, the result is the proliferation of conspiracy theories and a culture of distrust. Alex Jones isn't the answer, but neither is he the main problem. The problem is corruption in the mainstream media. That's far more pressing than grassroots videos that while probably incorrect at least challenge people to question what they're told. I think there's a general and growing distrust of media that feeds into people like Alex Jones' popularity. I don't know how many of those people take him 100% seriously vs how many are just happy listening to an outsider that's taking shots at known corruption.
- wavefunction 7y agoMy issue with conspiracy theory commercializers is that they don't give or promote the intellectual tools to "question what they're told", they just prompt people (primarily through appeals to emotion, especially fear and anger) and then turn it into a commercial product that justifies any lie. And there are real social effects from these conspiracy peddlers, like people who've lost their young children in a mass shooting receiving death threats and accusations that their dear child never existed and it's all a hoax. I mean, I saw an anti-vaxxer post from social media that unknowingly suggested "a small piece of a virus instead of toxic chemicals" as an alternative to vaccines...
- krapp 7y agoIt would be one thing if Alex Jones and his ilk were actually challenging people to think critically and be skeptical, and look for evidence before reaching conclusions and to be aware of biases both external and internal. Those are useful values. But they simply declare that the entirety of the mainstream narrative is a lie (and that, therefore, only the alternative can be trusted) and then tell you exactly what to believe and then eventually sell you gold coins to hide under your mattress for when the globalist feminazi lizard-men finally come for your guns and precious bodily fluids. People like Alex Jones aren't helping anyone, certainly not honest skeptics, I don't understand the efforts I see to portray him and others like him as merely the loyal opposition telling truth to power, or something akin to a court jester. Ok. The mainstream media is biased and corrupt... but if someone thinks the mainstream media is more biased and more corrupt than much of the alt-conspiracy media, they're very much mistaken.
- creaghpatr 7y ago>After inquiries from The Wall Street Journal, Amazon took down “Endgame” and two other videos from Mr. Jones—all self-uploaded, according to the company—citing violations of company policy. The company’s content policy focuses on issues pertaining to the sexually explicit, violence and copyright infringement, but it gives Amazon leeway to disallow anything it deems inappropriate. Another successful shakedown.
- parliament32 7y agoPaywalled https://archive.is/1pzuJ https://archive.is/1pzuJ
- colordrops 7y agoHow dare someone provide an open forum and allow individuals to investigate and use their own critical thinking skills? It goes against the principles of our constitution.
- influx 7y agoYes, we should create licenses, and it should be vetted by the existing media institutions to make sure the opinions and facts are correct!
- mbreedlove 7y agoWe can call it "fact checking"!
- ineedasername 7y agoYou say that as though people aren't susceptible to influence form malicious actors spouting propaganda. It's pretty clear that the current state of affairs allows a greater degree of emotional and psychological manipulation than has been possible in the past. That rather undercuts your idea that rational people can bring their critical thinking skills to bear on it and cut through it. It's simply not how human psychology works. All of which is somewhat besides the point and off topic from this particular issue: When Amazon Video started out, it was not an open forum-- it was not YouTube. Part of its appeal was that it was a somewhat curated selection of content. Watering that down with content that takes more time & mental effort to sift through the crap isn't really a great experience or what drew people to the platform. Believing Amazon shouldn't do that is hardly a blow against free speech or something. I also fail to see how curated content somehow goes against the values of the constitution. Every news paper, book publisher, TV channel or other media outlet, ever, has exerted editorial discretion over the content they choose to make available. Believing that model to be superior to a "fire hose" approach is not inherently anti-constitutional.
- colordrops 7y agoIt doesn't literally go against the constitution, but there are no open forums anymore as they've all resorted to deplatforming because they keep pushing this message you support, that they know better than the lowly masses. Even 4chan has been heavily mitigated. You are wrong if you think the people running mass media outlets have your best interests in mind when they decide which content is kosher and which is not. I'd rather filter through a lot of junk than not have access at all to the few valuable and truthful bits that get "caught" in the corporate filter as false positives.
- exabrial 7y agoDon't forget Netflix, who is hosting Anti-Vax shows and movies and causing immense harm.
- neonate 7y agohttp://archive.md/1pzuJ http://archive.md/1pzuJ
- ogre_codes 7y agoAmazon is shooting themselves in the foot here. Prime Video is already mediocre so adding more crappy content just brings their average down.
- lucasmullens 7y agoDo you compare streaming services by their average video? I just like the ones that have the content I want to watch, extra crappy videos don't really seem to get in the way since I never notice them.
- ogre_codes 7y agoI judge services based on how difficult it is to find something entertaining to watch. Frequently on Amazon Prime I spend more time sifting through piles of trash than actually streaming content because aside from a small amount of decent original content it's a mess. Between that and content which is not included in the service but presented in search results I've pretty much given up on the service outside unless I know exactly what I'm looking for.
- rowathray 7y agoWhy not take down books too? What if Alex Jones publishes a book with the exact same content? Why does the video get zapped, but the book doesn't?
- IfOnlyYouKnew 7y agoBecause these people don't read.
- rchaud 7y agoNow that everyone and their dog appears to be offering their own streaming service, we are right back to the "app store" days of competing on the basis of "total number of apps". Quantity over quality. BlackberryOS and Windows Phone tried this tactic by offering incentives for developers to build on their platform. The result? A veritable deluge of Bible apps, dictionaries, websites wrapped as native apps, you name it. Both BB and Microsoft were so desperate to get the total app numbers up, they did close to no quality control, and pretty much every garbage app went through unless they had blatant copyright violations. With user reviews eliminated from the big networks (I have Prime and haven't seen any user-written reviews in the UI), all we have to go on is the all-knowing algorithm to recommend what to watch next.
- lozaning 7y agoWhen I was still in school Microsoft would show up like once a semester and throw a "Build an app party". They'd give you like 90% of the code and files need to make a really simple slot machine app (no real money, if you ran out you tapped the get more coins button or something). It took like 15 minutes to finish the app, and if you published your version in the MS app store they'd give you like $600 in free MS hardware right then and there. It was great, I did it every semester.
- Nightshaxx 7y agoWell...dang....that's pretty good....
- big_chungus 7y agoHere I am wishing they had showed up at my school. Out of curiosity, what hardware did they give you?
- nlbrown 7y agoPerhaps Amazon is offering quantity over quality with prime video (and everything else) but there are numerous dedicated streaming services like HBO, Funimation, or Disney+ which have both large and high quality libraries.
- matt_morgan 7y agoOMG this complaint is 20 years old. It is true of every new thing on the Internet since the beginning of the Internet.
- rootsudo 7y agoHow does this compare to Youtube? There's no barriers there.
- quindecagon 7y agoWhat is more dangerous, Alex Jones saying there are chemicals that make frogs gay or all major news sources saying that Iraq had WMD?
- kyleee 7y agoGoing by death count I'd hazard the opinion that Alex Jones is much safer, despite personally finding many of Jones' statements unpalatable.
- pnako 7y agoJones was not completely wrong. The chemicals don't make the frogs 'gay' but they definitely severely mess with their sexuality https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842049/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842049/
- krapp 7y agoAlex Jones didn't just say there are chemicals in the water turning the frogs gay. Alex Jones said the government was deliberately putting chemicals into the water as part of a chemical warfare operation to increase the homosexual population and reduce birthrates, and that the frogs turning gay was the proof. It doesn't matter that he was a little bit wrong about the actual effect of the chemicals on amphibian sexuality, he was very wrong about his actual claim, that being that gay people are bioweapons in a secret program of mass human genocide.
- filoleg 7y agoWhile Alex Jones was undoubtedly wrong on that one, I believe the source of his misinformation didn't come out of nowhere. Which is exactly what the parent comment was trying to illustrate. Take a few pieces of truth, fill the gaps with wild imagination and emotionally charged responses, and you get Alex Jones and his content. Back in the 90s, US Air Force Research Laboratory was indeed working on a halitosis bomb that would do exactly that - turn those impacted by it gay.[0] As far as the wikipedia page goes, it seems like they didn't succeed in producing an actual halitosis bomb (and I have zero reason to believe otherwise, but I bet some Alex Jones supporters might disagree with me here), however it was included on their 3 pages long proposal paper for possible nonlethal chemical weapons. Which proves that there was some research on it and that the intended purpose of the hypothetical "gay bomb" was to use it as a nonlethal chemical weapon. 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_bomb https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_bomb
- lpolovets 7y agoNetflix has some similar content, like the recent series about Goop: https://collider.com/the-goop-lab-review-netflix-gwyneth-paltrow/ https://collider.com/the-goop-lab-review-netflix-gwyneth-pal.... I'm disappointed by both companies. I can't imagine these kinds of moves drive revenue in a meaningful way, but they have a lot of (social) downside by legitimizing harmful views.
- crazynick4 7y agoYes, let's have Netflix and Amazon decide what is a legitimate view. If you don't like it don't watch it. Unless these films are actively calling for violence (I dont know if they are) I don't see what the problem is.
- mplewis 7y agoActively calling for violence isn't the only way for a piece of media to cause social harm.
- Apocryphon 7y agoBoth private bookstores and public libraries curate their offerings selectively. This isn't the Internet Archive, the equivalent to the Library of Congress or another institution that stores everything.
- catalogia 7y agoI don't know the details, but I believe the Internet Archive has some minimal filtering now as well, beyond their normal DMCA compliance. For a while they seemed to be the host of choice for extremist propaganda, ISIS videos and the like, but from what I've heard they did something to crack down on that.
- crazynick4 7y agoI'm not saying they don't have the right to curate, I'm just saying people shouldn't expect them to do so just to exclude fringe opinions.
- 7y ago
- aaron695 7y agoWait till the Wall Street Journal hears about the religious channel.
- WheelsAtLarge 7y agoThe other day I started to watch a pretty crappy documentary about the founding fathers. I was surprised how it could be part of prime video given its low-quality writing and filming. Now I understand, I guess Amazon is positioning the service at just above YouTube when it comes to quality.
- stallmanite 7y agoYouTube is very heterogeneous. By far the highest quality content I’ve ever encountered has been on YouTube. You just have to know what to look for. The lowest common denominator is always going to suck.