4 ms·
> Again, they don't care if you stay on the platform. Why not? Even if you're right that they care more about propaganda than money, what's the point of propag
by retsibsi 6y ago
> Again, they don't care if you stay on the platform.
Why not? Even if you're right that they care more about propaganda than money, what's the point of propagandising to an empty room?
- EricE 6y agoIf logic were involved we wouldn't be having a discussion about removing dislikes in the first place, no? :)
- retsibsi 6y agoCome on, I'm trying not to dismiss your perspective just because it sounds a bit conspiratorial, but this is not convincing. Are you saying the YouTube execs (or whoever is leaning on them) are just acting emotionally with no strategy?
- EricE 6y agoThere is absolutely a strategy - there is a particular point of view they favor, and anything counter to it is removed. Dislikes are embarrassing to, for lack of better terminology, their pet causes. Simply disabling them on certain videos or channels calls even more attention to them - so why not just remove them entirely. The only thing surprising to me is that it took them this long.
- jasonfarnon 6y agoIt doesn't need to be that dislikes are embarrassing to their pet causes. There were a few instances where business partners would, e.g., post an ad campaign that got so many dislikes the dislike ratio entered the news cycle. I'm sure google gets pressure from their business/ad partners when that goes down.
- yjftsjthsd-h 6y agoWouldn't business partners be a trivial subset of their pet causes? It's not just a political set.
- markdown 6y agoWhat a silly conspiracy theory. If the wanted to hide embarrassing downvotes on certain videos, they'd just remove those downvotes, not the entire feature.
- lawnchair_larry 6y agoThey do that too
- markdown 6y agoSo why would they remove the feature if it worked better manipulated?
- EricE 6y agoWhen it's only the same kinds of content that has to have special treatment, that special treatment still calls unwanted attention. So hence why the whole feature is pRoBlEmAtIc and must be removed :p
- bobthechef 6y agoPeople won't leave that easily. Nobody compares to YouTube. Facebook had no way of voicing disapproval for a long time and membership still increased. They are testing various options which might mean they're weighting the relative benefits and damage. And besides, they may be in a position where they have no choice if propaganda is more important than money.
- asiachick 6y agofacebook still has no way to voice disapproval. They have like, love, care, haha, wow, sad, angry Angry != disapprove because in the context of the other "emotions" it does not distinguish between disliking the post itself, or what it's referencing. If you post "Candidate X did Y" are you angry because the candidate did Y or because your friend posted something anti candidate X?