12 ms·
Because they are finally learning that all it takes to destroy their business is an algorithm glitch, or having 'wrong' political views, or just falling on the
by Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
Because they are finally learning that all it takes to destroy their business is an algorithm glitch, or having 'wrong' political views, or just falling on the wrong side of an overzealous moderator.
When you use someone else's platform you are completely dependent on the owner of the platform, and being dependent on something you don't control is a huge business risk.
- devoutsalsa 6y agoEven if you keep up with what’s politically correct, your old content can become increasingly unfavorable. You can get railroaded for something you said 10 years ago that was seemingly alright at the time. I cringe at myself 10 years ago.
- xyst 6y agothankfully I never recorded my cod:black ops sessions :)
- hobofan 6y agoAnd how is that different on any other platform?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- sithlord 6y agoYoutube could easily just obliterate a channel today, for some video posted 10 years ago if they deem it bad enough. Doubt if you had your own platform you'd delete yourself for something cringe you said 10 years ago
- katsura 6y agoYes, but most people don't build their own server farms, don't have their own internet cable, so basically there is always some company in the middle that could easily cancel you.
- gsich 6y agoIt's much harder if you have actual humans on the other side.
- dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago> don't have their own internet cable Owning cable doesn't help much as this cable sooner or later needs to be connected to some router that doesn't belong to you. A better solution is to host in a country where political correctness is much weaker than in the West.
- hobofan 6y agoThe general "danger" of old videos comes more from people digging up what was said and causing a shitstorm because of it, rather than Youtube themselves going out of their way to delete channels because of old videos. If people want to dig through your old videos and want to cause a shitstorm, self-hosting isn't going to protect you.
- devoutsalsa 6y agoI don’t like a lot of the things being done by people who get deplatformed, but honestly I think there should be protections against cutting people off. Before the internet, I never worried about not being able to use the postal service or making a phone call. But now I worry about something stupid happening that obliterates my online life because Google decides to nuke my account.
- Bakary 6y agoStart moving to as many non-Google servies as possible. Some things are hard to replace, some aren't.
- JProthero 6y agoI think I agree that uploaders face more of a threat from censorious activists reviewing their old material than they do from retroactive deletion prompted by YouTube policy changes, but surely self-hosting would provide some protection, assuming the audience would be willing and able to transition to a different source? It seems to me that hosting and payment processing companies ultimately present the greater service denial risk for uploaders with an established audience, though YouTube can definitely hamper new viewer discovery, and there is more competition (and therefore more alternatives) in hosting and payments.
- user-the-name 6y agoWhat "wrong" political views are those?
- konjin 6y agoAll of them.
- user-the-name 6y agoAll political views? You get kicked off Youtube for having any political view at all?
- Covzire 6y agoCuriously, virtually all "legal speech" bans and demonetization happen to be for opinions or content that disagree with whatever talking points the DNC and/or the CCP are pushing. I know this will get down votes but that's literally the truth. Opposing the CCP is marginally safer but not at all when they encroach on DNC statements.
- fallingknife 6y agoApparently, in the case of Parler, believing that you should allow users to post any legal content without moderation. (I know they didn't lose their domain, but the effect of being denied hosting is functionally the same.)
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- celticninja 6y agoThe problem, as I understand it was not the posting of legal content but the fact it wasn't moderated meant there was borderline stuff, calls for specific people to be killed etc, that were the key factor in them losing hosting.
- kebman 6y ago
- xienze 6y ago> When you use someone else's platform you are completely dependent on the owner of the platform, and being dependent on something you don't control is a huge business risk. Being off of YouTube doesn’t make you immune to this. You can still be deplatformed by your host, domain registrar, payment processor, etc.
- flyinglizard 6y agoAll of the examples you listed are easily recovered from and don’t cause a complete disconnect from your audience in the same way YouTube deplatforming does. From Amazon sellers to YouTubers to high ranking apps to prominent social media profiles, I’m in awe of how much value sits at the whim of some platform which usually won’t even have a person to talk with on the other end.
- mdavidn 6y agoUnlike YouTube, a business can replace many of these services transparently from the perspective of their customers.
- 2pEXgD0fZ5cF 6y agoI agree, it is easier to replace a single part if you don't put your whole presence into one single monolith. It also helps that many other companies offer the benefit of being able to reach an actual human in case something goes wrong, which is something that is basically impossible with anything Google.
- matheusmoreira 6y agoThere are hosts out there which will host you as long as you're not breaking any laws. This is actually how things should work. Registrars won't take away your domain just because they don't like your site. Companies will delete your personal account on their platforms without even talking to you. I can't think of any case where a domain was seized without a court order. Circumventing payment processor censorship is one of the many purposes of cryptocurrency technology. All you have to do is accept Monero as payment. The more people that do this, the more legitimate and popular and well supported it will be.
- vkou 6y agoThe same can be said for anyone working in the offline entertainment sector. People get blacklisted from Hollywood for upsetting powerful individuals (Weinstein destroyed a lot of careers this way, for a most recent example, before he was sent to prison.) Generally speaking, any industry where your revenue relies on marketing, promotion, or access to exclusive collaboration and distribution networks is going to have this property. If you've made it really big, you can try to mitigate risk by doing your own marketing, or owning your own share of the distribution channel. For all the B-list actors, though, the economics of that aren't very favourable.
- monadic8 6y agoYes, these platforms primarily exist to drain revenue from the long tail of unappreciated content. I don't think that's a positive thing.
- vkou 6y agoYou've described the internet in a nutshell. Computers make it possible to make money off the long tail, that would have otherwise languished in obscurity. The alternatives are either a return to syndication, or a transition to some kind of non-market public cultural utility for distributing and promoting my cat videos. Or, we remain in what currently seems to be a local maximum, where distribution and marketing is cheap, but not so cheap that most content creators are doing it themselves.
- Aunche 6y agoNo matter what type of small business you are, relying on a single source of revenue is always a massive risk. Youtube is no different in that regard. It's a good idea to diversify if you can.