YouTube choosing who gets to manipulate what you are going to see is another reframing of this, that might make more sense. Since we've seen a considerable amo

YouTube choosing who gets to manipulate what you are going to see is another reframing of this, that might make more sense. Since we've seen a considerable amount of what you get when somebody is able to pay YouTube, and pay Facebook, to specify what you're going to see, on a very granular and Big Data level, in a targeted way. In a real and practical sense YouTube having access to extremely effective social media tools and just hiring them out to any bozo offering money, with no accountability for who's trying to accomplish what, is the thing that's as far from democracy as you can get. I feel that the people most hot to argue for a 'unmediated' world, and most freaked out if this is challenged, are the people who are in fact putting a lot of time, money and effort into mediating and manipulating this 'unmediated' world to be unrepresentative of reality in a way that benefits them and their intentions. Then if you do challenge them, they simply lie to your face and say it's all about freedom versus censorship… because to win, they need to retain the ability to mediate the world to their liking, and even to acknowledge that this is possible suggests the possibility that they are already doing it as hard as they can, and know it.