3 ms·

This is the same with your example though? Anyone can upload a video talking about the coronavirus, they just might not receive money for it (they'll be demonet

This is the same with your example though? Anyone can upload a video talking about the coronavirus, they just might not receive money for it (they'll be demonetized). Youtube only seems to be taking an active 'censorship' approach for comments spreading bad information about the virus. Whether or not "against WHO advice" is a good metric for this is debatable, but the goal seems worthwhile. > The issue with censorship is that it has to grow. You can't defend taking down say, videos about the Israel BDS movement, and not also take down videos about Free HK. I fail to see how this property, if it exists, is any less present in a "moderated but without explicit censhorship" system.

vorpalhex 7y ago
Demonetization is a form of censorship when Youtube is your paycheck. If your employer threatened to not pay you because you took a political position that would be abhorrent and oppressive treatment. Youtube is not a direct employee and it's more of a business partner, but it's wielding it's power to control speech - which is oppressive.
- lxmorj 7y ago
  I wonder - does YouTube still serve ads in ‘demonetized’ videos and just cut out the creators commissions?
stcredzero 7y ago
Youtube only seems to be taking an active 'censorship' approach Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky wrote an entire book about 'censorship' that's not technically censorship, titled Manufacturing Consent. Rather, what happens in the industrialized west uses soft influence and economic power to achieve the same ends. Media in such a "propaganda model" of operation does technically disseminate information, but does it in such a way as to reduce visibility, reduce emotional impact, and economically discourage. Actually, the power to engage in a "propaganda model" of operation enjoyed by YouTube is in many ways much more immediate and absolute than that exercised by the western governments in the 20th century.

vorpalhex 7y ago

Demonetization is a form of censorship when Youtube is your paycheck. If your employer threatened to not pay you because you took a political position that would be abhorrent and oppressive treatment. Youtube is not a direct employee and it's more of a business partner, but it's wielding it's power to control speech - which is oppressive.

lxmorj 7y ago
I wonder - does YouTube still serve ads in ‘demonetized’ videos and just cut out the creators commissions?

stcredzero 7y ago

Youtube only seems to be taking an active 'censorship' approach Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky wrote an entire book about 'censorship' that's not technically censorship, titled Manufacturing Consent. Rather, what happens in the industrialized west uses soft influence and economic power to achieve the same ends. Media in such a "propaganda model" of operation does technically disseminate information, but does it in such a way as to reduce visibility, reduce emotional impact, and economically discourage. Actually, the power to engage in a "propaganda model" of operation enjoyed by YouTube is in many ways much more immediate and absolute than that exercised by the western governments in the 20th century.