5 ms·
Everybody understands that. But reach is taken from them. That's a extremely important effect. Way more important than the radicalisation, because if these peop
by jessah 6y ago
Everybody understands that. But reach is taken from them. That's a extremely important effect. Way more important than the radicalisation, because if these people seek out new platforms to radicalize them self, they would likely have done so in every case. The danger of radicalizing a bigger part of the population is what is at stake here.
- ehsankia 6y agoThere are 3 scenarios: 1. Someone who is radicalized digging deeper 2. Someone who is radicalized changing their mind 3. Someone who is not radicalized getting radicalized #1 is bound to happen, #2 has no chance of happening, so at this point, preventing #3 is the way to go. Keeping these already radicalized people on Youtube achieves nothing. On the other hand, keeping them on Youtube gives these them a huge platform to spread misinformation. Newsmax nad OANN don't have anywhere near the reach Youtube does, especially outside the existing bubble.
- seppin 6y agoHonestly if the choice is between no bans and allowing the current trends of radicalization continue, almost any outcome is preferable than what we've seen happen the last 5-10 years.
- throwaway3699 6y agoReally? Things only really hit the fan when the bans scaled up. I don't ever remember things being this bad 5 years ago.
- seppin 6y agounprovable/unknowable and subjective analysis. Youtube banning people doesn't radicalize them, radicalizing content delivered to million of people on youtube radicalizes them. A point so simple it feels silly to point it out, but here we are.
- redflame7 6y agoRadicalization doesn't just happen, it has to make deep intuitive sense to that person based on their own prejudices. You can't convince a normal person to kill people by showing them a bunch of videos, but you can convince people not to believe hanlon's razor and therefore deepen their hatred.
- greenflame7 6y agoRadicalization doesn’t just happen it has to make deep intuitive sense to that person based on their own prejudice. You can’t convince a normal person to kill people by showing them a bunch of videos but you can convince people not to believe hanlon’s razor and therefore deepen their hatred by false attribution of malice where none exists
- cmroanirgo 6y agoMost content is "delivered" in the form of suggested videos from within youtube itself and other social graphs that seem unwilling to concede that they might be part of the problem itself. The rate of spread is a problem of YouTube's own devising based on clicks, views and likes. Remove this gamification and you'll see less engagement, hence less scale of radicalization. With youtube labeling people "radicals" is a deliberate polarising term designed to do little more than tar and feather people into a specific box. Just like segregation, just like Protestants, just like the German Jews... Etc. It's very unflattering.
- ehsankia 6y agoAntivaxx and other conspiracy theories on the internet weren't anywhere as big anywhere else either, you're trying to assign causation where there is none. Youtube didn't start banning antivaxx until way way after it was already massive and out of control.
- lawnchair_larry 6y agoHow is newsmax “radicalized”?
- spoopyskelly 6y agoCaters to the other side, therefore bad.
- abacadaba 6y agospoopyskelly 3 minutes ago [dead] [–] Caters to the other side, therefore bad.
- TylerE 6y agoThey're a firehose of hyper-partisan swill not supported by facts. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/newsmax/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/newsmax/ "Overall, we rate Newsmax Right Biased and Questionable based on the promotion of conspiracy theories and pseudoscience as well as numerous failed fact checks. (M. Huitsing 10/8/2017) Updated (11/12/2020)"
- greenflame7 6y agoNeither is MSNBC, CNN, or FOX and they havent been for quite sometime.
- swirepe 6y ago#2 can happen. It happens when a person is shown that whatever they are feeling isn't the result of something inevitable https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C22&q=redirection+method+radicalization&oq=redirection+method+radicali https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C22&q=red...
- koolba 6y ago> The danger of radicalizing a bigger part of the population is what is at stake here. The real danger is that, one day, your own ideas are the ones considered too radical.
- Animats 6y agoThe real danger is that, one day, your own ideas are the ones considered too radical. True. Worse, the acceptable range of opinions within both the US right and the US left have narrowed.
- stormcode 6y agoI used to strongly believe this but now I think we've moved beyond having a public discourse and into things that are not protected speech. The president and others inciting violence against people doing their jobs, and those that are megaphoning those claims and calls to action deserve to be shutdown and deplatformed before someone is killed.
- greenflame7 6y agoYou should go meet the people that you are afraid of, you might find them not as bad as you’ve been told.