8 ms·
YouTube Sponsored Freedom of Expression Award Goes to YouTube CEO [video]
- DiabloD3 5y agoI can't tell if this is a tone deaf joke or not.
- bpodgursky 5y agoIt looks real to me... which is pretty astounding.
- Qw3r7 5y agoIts up there with GM receiving awards from JD Power lol. But there is nothing stopping itself from being a joke and tone deaf! Is there a way an award that is for industry that isnt the Nobel prize for something like this?
- nuisance-bear 5y agoIt's like military officers in failed states. They are covered head-to-toe in medals an epaulets. "Honors is epaulets. My pop pop taught me that." -RPF
- thaumasiotes 5y agoThis is also true of non-failed states. Is there a lesson to draw?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- theparanoid 5y agoThe irony considering YouTube's step up of purging channels with alternative viewpoints.
- the-dude 5y agoHow dare you to think different.
- donw 5y ago“Different” is superfluous.
- TheAdamAndChe 5y agoWhat's interesting is that the majority of her speech is discussing the suppression of free expression, saying how "authoritative" sources are given priority, advertiser-friendly videos are rewarded and given priority, and others are suppressed. You can argue the necessity of those actions, but trying to call those actions examples of free expression is the kind of corporate double-speak that erodes trust.
- newswasboring 5y agoI find the use of the word suppress to describe what youtube does a bit odd. Now, I am of the opinion that youtube doesn't outright ban most things they find objectionable. That would be suppression (please tell me if I am wrong about this, because otherwise my next few sentences are just fundamentally wrong). What I see youtube doing is promoting content they like. The video is not itself deleted, its just not promoted (both to users and advertisers). Would you really call that suppression? You can argue its suppression in the sense that when you are so powerful any decision regarding disadvantaging someone is suppression. But I am not totally convinced by that argument, because curating a platform is their entire purpose at this point.
- TheAdamAndChe 5y agoI would agree with you if YouTube had started as a platform that from the beginning publicly promoted videos that were advertiser-friendly, but that's not what they did. For years, their algorithms were tailored only to show users the content that they liked, regardless of advertiser status. They had the goofiest, weirdest stuff perfectly suited to my weird personality. They showed lectures and political discussions that I liked discussing. Then they made the algorithm changes. Instead of showing me videos I like, they suggest videos they like. Those videos often clash with my values or beliefs, but because they are mainstream, they get pushed anyway ad nauseum. The change of state in the algorithm could be considered suppression. Another way of looking at it would be just the viewer counts of certain categories of videos has plummeted. Alt-right speakers and lecturers, flat-earthers, trump supporters, racial identitarians, and so on have seen a massive drop in viewers. Right or wrong, that algorithmic change that led to a drop in viewers is a form of suppression. I want to emphasize that suppression isn't always wrong. A massive site like YouTube has to monitor for violent social contagion and contain that. But I don't think they should then use their suppression as an example of free expression, because it's not. Edit: also to be absolutely clear here, the definition of "suppression" I'm using is the intentional attempt by YouTube to reduce the viewership and engagement in something.
- thedanbob 5y agoYou'd think there would be at least one person involved with enough self-awareness to say, "You know, maybe we should disable comments and voting on this video."
- blacktriangle 5y agoBecause nothing says freedom of expression like silencing people.
- breakfastduck 5y agoYou'd hope that there wouldn't be a single person involved with such a lack of self-awareness to suggest that a video about a freedom of expression award should have user expression blocked.
- thedanbob 5y agoHah, good point. I guess if they're going to be this tone-deaf they just have to accept the backlash.
- breakfastduck 5y agoIt's kinda better if they know there will be a backlash and go ahead anyway out of evil or whatever. It's considerably more disheartening to think that there are people out there with this level of power with no fucking connection with reality.
- newswasboring 5y agoHere is a wikipedia page[1] for most disliked youtube videos. On balance I think Sadak 2 trailer wins with 13 mil views and 94.8% dislikes. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-disliked_YouTube_videos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-disliked_YouTube_... edit: a word
- jetrink 5y agoVotes currently stand at 34 likes to 11,000 dislikes. Is that a record low ratio on a video with a non-trivial amount of votes?
- dTal 5y agoDo they... do they not realize how this looks?
- medicineman 5y agoLike giving the peace prize to the droner-in-chief.
- eplanit 5y agoThis isn't parody/sarcasm?
- lvs 5y agoThat is an Onion headline if I ever saw one.
- chaps 5y agoRackspace did similar a few years back when they awarded their CEO with their most fanatical award or whatever it was called. Don't think he stayed at the company for much longer, either.
- proactivesvcs 5y agoI almost posted a funny reply in the throng of the comments, then realised I don't want to jeopardise my Google account. I didn't reply.
- notdang 5y agoThe title on HN was also changed.
- teddyh 5y agoThis right here. Many people say things like “Google would never…”, and they might be right. But that’s not what matters, what matters is people’s beliefs about what Google would do. And this is why Google should have absolutely no influence over your web browser, your programming language, etc. Again, that’s perceived influence, not actual influence. The fear exists regardless.
- grep_name 5y ago> your programming language This is something I've been thinking about. Does anyone avoid Go the way that they avoid other google products? Why or why not? I've been liking it a lot lately as a systems programming language but am not sure how to parse the google side of the equation, as I try to avoid most google offerings
- teddyh 5y ago> Does anyone avoid Go […] Well, I do, and I’ve written about it here before¹, but I usually get only downvotes for saying it. 1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17162582 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17162582 and earlier https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8733705 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8733705
- grep_name 5y agoThanks for this, it is important to consider the trend of company-owned languages and what it means to participate in that. It'll probably knock me off of Go eventually. Unfortunately I don't see many alternatives that have all the benefits I like about go, but I'll keep looking
- vmception 5y agoOur Freedom of Expression award comrades
- mc32 5y agoAt least when the Nobel committee awarded the peace prize to Obama before he trotted into the Middle East they have the excuse of not having a crystal ball into the future. Here despite all evidence to the contrary and its being a commercial endeavor, which entails conflict of interest, they grant this antithesis to freedom of expression an award for freedom of expression. Excuse me if I feel disturbed by their apparent lack of awareness or gross farce.
- whatshisface 5y ago>At least when the Nobel committee awarded the peace prize to Obama before he trotted into the Middle East they have the excuse of not having a crystal ball into the future. That's not much of an excuse, typically people wait for after something happens to deliver an award for it.
- mc32 5y agoI agree, but at least they can claim they based it on hope due to promises. This award, on the contrary, is looking back with an abundance of evidence to the contrary and despite that evidence go on with a complete farce. Even Soviets would put on some pretense of legitimacy.
- ravenstine 5y agoMy favorite, and maybe a somewhat more apt example involving Obama, was when South Korea gave him a tae kwan do black belt. https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/obama-lee-myungbak-korea-black-belt.html https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/obama-le... I don't really have much against Obama (and not like he couldn't accept it), but that was a real "oh brother" moment for me.
- StandardFuture 5y agoPerhaps someone misunderstood or misheard the phrase "America's First Black (belt) President".
- the-dude 5y agoHN Title used to read : YouTube Sponsored Freedom of Expression Award Goes to YouTube CEO
- jsnk 5y agoIt's a way better title indicating the corporate sponsored nature of the award and the blatant conflict of interest on the award committee and Youtube.
- dang 5y agoYes, corporate press releases are an exception to the usual HN title rule. I'll change it back. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=corporate%20press%20release%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...
- greatgib 5y agoOrignal title was so much more better, or at least mention that it is for her incredible work at Youtube censoring videos...
- fsflover 5y agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26880262 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26880262
- vmception 5y agoThis is one of those scenarios where a large organization hired a female CEO to crucify her The wrong kind of inclusivity, California, tech, Alphabet
- yunohn 5y agoYou're suggesting that she was hired in 2014 for inclusivity, and spent the last decade making YT the most popular video streaming website ever.. just to give this "award" in 2021 to crucify her?
- vmception 5y agoNot hired for inclusivity, but now to crucify her, yes Everyone should have thought twice here and they didn’t
- hervature 5y agoAre you saying that female CEOs can't crucify themselves? She didn't have to accept this award.
- vmception 5y agoNothing I said is to suggest a reduced sense of agency or choice for females Only the sad example this sets that suggests they have to be even more vigilant to shut down bad optics that the divisions they oversee will create or that their parent company might throw onto them, a distraction which is the opposite of privilege
- prvc 5y agoIs this one of those "conspiracy theories", about which I have been hearing so much lately?
- vmception 5y agoTitle changed does nothing dang, a youtube free expression award is paradoxical and ironic even before they awarded to themselves and by themselves I mean the CEO
- plank_time 5y agoLol YouTube giving their CEO an award for freedom of expression is just about the most Orwellian thing I’ve seen in a long, long time. And it seems like they did it without it being a joke which is absurd and scary too. They are so far in their own bubble and echo chamber they have no idea what the real world thinks or cares.
- throw7 5y agoThis was 14 days late.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- sova 5y agoMaybe Feynman was right about prizes...
- ortusdux 5y agoI wonder if they will censor the comments or turn off commenting, because they are pretty critical at the moment.
- somethingtoday 5y agoThe irony of the title change on this specific topic is striking.
- endominus 5y agoI just did a cursory search. This video was posted a few days ago, but there seems to be zero chatter from American news sites (at least, ones with recognizable names) about it - not even Fox. I'd expect at least some of them to be firing back about "trolls" and "sexists" harassing and insulting Susan Wojcicki, like what happened with [female-protagonist-led Hollywood movie]. The silence is interesting, given the previous narratives. I wonder what's different now.
- stackedinserter 5y agoAside of the absurd nomination/awards: how come that YouTube is CEO-less company for media? When FB screws up, Zuck's grim is everywhere in media, but when YouTube does the same orwellian stuff, it's just... YouTube, like there's no person behind it.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- bjornlouser 5y agoThis is the opening salvo in her bid for Kamala's Senate seat...
- CorruptedArc 5y agoIt'd be like Facebook giving themselves an award for information security and protection of personal data.
- grej 5y agoFarcical. I was going to downvote it, but didn’t want to find myself surprise locked out of my Gmail account a few months from now with no explanation.
- bassman9000 5y agoWhich is why you should start preparing for it ASAP.
- microdrum 5y agoI think YouTube will still remove a video if a scientist or physician talks about COVID having a 0.03% mortality rate.
- paxcoder 5y agoHello from the censored side.
- vonsydov 5y agoExtended April fools y’all
- goatcode 5y agoThe free expression in the video's comments is pretty good so far.
- rvz 5y agoSlight correction: Last place awarded for free expression goes to the YouTube CEO. From [0] > Our mission is to give everyone a voice and show them the world. > We believe that everyone deserves to have a voice, and that the world is a better place when we listen, share and build community through our stories. > Our values are based on four essential freedoms that define who we are. Mission failed successfully! [0] https://www.youtube.com/about/ https://www.youtube.com/about/
- bassman9000 5y agoI just noticed the top right Presented by signature sponsor: YouTube https://i.imgur.com/CwIpcbM.jpg https://i.imgur.com/CwIpcbM.jpg
- ofou 5y ago15 likes vs 15K DISLIKE, the ratio speak by itself. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDcvPf78g1k&ab_channel=FreedomForum https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDcvPf78g1k&ab_channel=Freed...
- BitwiseFool 5y agoThose dislikes are going to be removed soon. Only positivity is permitted. You can still downvote but the public will not be allowed to see signs of disapproval.
- DevKoala 5y agoSimilar to getting the Nobel Peace award for 8 years of war.