4 ms·
Well there are 2 aspects for this. Laws in general consider magnitude and criticality when defining measures. So would a judge. YouTube's reach implicitly means
by close04 7y ago
Well there are 2 aspects for this. Laws in general consider magnitude and criticality when defining measures. So would a judge. YouTube's reach implicitly means the potential for abuse is orders of magnitude higher. And the effects of that abuse are far more dangerous than what a small platform can induce.
The other part, the one I was mostly referring to, is moral. I know, it's a company, it doesn't need to have morals. But this shouldn't stop people from holding them to a higher standard.
With a flip of the algorithmic switch platforms like YouTube or Facebook can influence results of elections, escalate social issues over the tipping point, etc. Can you honestly say that my conclusion needed too much explaining?