22 ms·
YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponsored by YouTube
- belval 5y agoThis reads like an headline from "The Onion".
- gscott 5y agoWhich YouTube would turn around and censor
- thefounder 5y agoNot long time ago all the daily news headlines looked like from "The Onion".
- jkingsbery 5y agoThere was also an episode of The Office (US) about this. Dwight suggests to Jim he starts an employee-of-the-month award, then rigs it so Jim wins so that everyone turns on Jim. Jim at least had the good sense to decline the award.
- munk-a 5y agoWe can't really tell what is going on behind the curtain but my optimistic view is that no one in the room realized that receiving this award would have some terrible optics and that the awarders chose YouTube genuinely - if you have a narrow view of the content on there (and nobody sees everything) there are some segments where youtube does try to reinforce free speech sorta... maybe I'm being too charitable though. My cynical hope though is that Youtube pressured the award committee to give them one for hosting it - please someone in Youtube leak a memo about putting pressure on the committee it would be so absolutely delicious.
- benmmurphy 5y agoI thought this was the unwritten rule of how industry awards work. You sponsor them and then they give you an award. The people running the awards get money, and the people sponsoring them get something they can impress prospective clients with. Everyone wins!
- billh 5y agoAhh yes, the J.D. Power model of award giving.
- pjbk 5y agoCrazy. Now that you say that, I honestly thought it was a parody even showing up here in HN. Took me a few seconds to realize it was not when reading the article, and had to watch part of the video to convince myself. But then again, most news these days read like an Onion article of yesteryears. Just sad, not funny anymore.
- userbinator 5y agoI don't think the phrase "LOL WUT" has ever before captured my reaction so accurately upon reading a headline.
- bsaul 5y agoit almost reads like an oil company sponsoring an environmental ngo working on wildlife preservation.
- sigstoat 5y agothat at least has some positive benefit.
- srcmap 5y agoAnd the winner is Exxon.
- ganafagol 5y agoYou mean slonsoring an environmental achievements award which the oil company wins itself?
- Grustaf 5y agoNo it doesn't. Oil companies do that all the time, and it's great that at least of their money go to something worthwhile. In your analogy, it would be like Shell awarding Shell for its environmental work, while not doing any.
- mkl 5y agoBigger discussions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26880262 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26880262 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26875971 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26875971
- nprz 5y agoI'm not sure how the HN ranking algorithm works, but https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26880262 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26880262 seems to have been removed from the front page despite receiving 350+ upvotes within an hour of posting.
- jdsully 5y agoThere is a “flamewar” filter that derates content with too many back and forth replies.
- rodgerd 5y agoPerhaps Google can give themselves an "Ethics in AI" award, while they're at it.
- calltrak 5y agoThe "book burners" of Youtube have deplatformed 10's of thousands of content creators if said content goes against the real owners agenda and in most cases just the truth thats not the official conspiracy theory. If you put up a comment they don't like they delete it.. Freedom of speech award for this youtube. Now thats a joke! Speaking of jokes here is a joke. https://picc.io/p/tq2sFHU.png https://picc.io/p/tq2sFHU.png
- geniium 5y agoIs this some kind of joke? :/
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- qzw 5y agoAren't most industry awards really bought and paid for? Like the stuff they give out at conferences and from trade magazines.
- ardit33 5y agoYeah, but it is not so brazen, as there are more levels of indirection. This is way out of touch form the people involved in this
- ainar-g 5y agoHere[1] is the video. At the time of me writing this comment, the ratio is 53 likes to 15,486 dislikes. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDcvPf78g1k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDcvPf78g1k
- AlexandrB 5y agoI think this reflects the fact that no one is particularly happy with Youtube. Between the bans, increasingly aggressive (and abusable) copyright strikes, and constantly shifting rules around content and monetization most Youtubers I watch express unhappiness about some aspect of Youtube on a regular basis. Many have started seeking alternative revenue streams to mitigate platform risk.
- TameAntelope 5y agoI'm sorry, but I simply can't believe that "no one is particularly happy with YouTube" while so many people still use it, including the vast majority of the people who are supposedly "not particularly happy" with it. When people ask, "Why hasn't someone disrupted YouTube?" I think the more boring answer that keeps getting overlooked is that it still meets the expectations of enough users, and the dissatisfied constitute a small percentage. > Many have started seeking alternative revenue streams to mitigate platform risk. What's wild about this is that the content creators doing this still use YouTube! Even after fully acknowledging the problems, and actively mitigating those negative consequences, they still return to the platform. I just don't see how that'd happen if it were actually a "bad" service.
- onepointsixC 5y agoYoutube has operated at best break even revenue, but mostly at a loss for years. Who has the money necessary to do that for years and years?
- camjohnson26 5y agoAlphabet does. Most of their services run at a loss but they make so much from ad revenue it doesn’t matter.
- andrewclunn 5y agoThe best comments on this thread are the dead ones. The best YouTubers are the banned ones. The best books are the burned ones.
- zackees 5y ago13k downvotes, 30 upvotes.
- coolspot 5y agoIt is 30 YouTube engineers testing if the upvote button still works on the video after receiving tickets from upper management saying that “it can’t be that this video doesn’t have thousands of upvotes”.
- bitwize 5y agoNext phase is: downvotes disabled due to problems with unspecified state actors hacking the algorithm.
- alwayshasbeen 5y agoReminds me of when the president of a warring nation once won the Nobel Peace Prize.
- iab 5y agoI always think about Richard Feynmans take on awards and honors whenever these things get brought up: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fes-kqRDRoY https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fes-kqRDRoY
- realsimplesynd 5y agoI wonder if there is a correlation between being super good and having a disdain for awards or not.
- capableweb 5y agoDo you have a disdain for awards?
- iab 5y agoIt’s the only attribute Feynman and I share ;)
- b0afc375b5 5y agoYes, I hate awards. In my own experience, awards have only inflated my ego, and has not led me to become more productive or passionate about the things I excel at. It made me complacent and less likely to go above and beyond at work, possibly because I have the feeling that I've already "reached it", whatever that means.
- xyzzy21 5y agoProbably akin to how if you are truly competent you don't need to oversell yourself. The smartest PhDs I've ever met in Silicon Valley NEVER TOLD ANYONE they had PhDs. The dumbest ones ALWAYS led with "I'm a PhD" or "call me doctor"!
- ChrisArchitect 5y ago[dupe] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26880262 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26880262
- idownvoted 5y agoJust a misunderstanding. The "Free Expression" award goes to overachievers in the field of redefining the "expression" of "freedom". Hey, which soon-to-be-fired sub-contractor forgot to turn off the downvotes on YouTube?
- cryptica 5y agoI refreshed the HN home page and, for a brief moment, on the same page there was "YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponsored by YouTube" right above another link about YouTube CEO banning videos which don't align with COVID19 WHO guidelines... We live in a clown world. Even if people thought that what she did was a good thing (which is debatable), it's a ridiculous idea to reward someone for enabling 'free speech' when in fact they've been suppressing it. That makes no sense at all. It's cringeworthy that anyone would not realize that this award is a prank. I wonder if the people who issued this award and the person receiving it know that it's a prank...
- throwaway3699 5y agoIt's become part of corporate elite politics that "freedom of expression" means having "trolls", "Russian bots" and "conspiracy theorists" removed from the conversation. This has also crippled any kind of political conversation on the website that isn't full of people saying codewords and secret phrases to avoid the ban hammer.
- jollybean 5y agoLet this be a lesson to all: intelligence does not in any way correlate with self awareness. It's likely that 'smart' people are just as likely to be unaware of their own follies or inabilities, I would argue, maybe more so as a lot of smart people tend to be 'inwardly focused' and less concerned about their direct environment. This kind of thing happens all the time among Exec. level, but normally we'd expect it from Ford CEO, not Google types. It may be an odd sign of industry maturity. That said, we shouldn't discount how often this kind of stuff actually does work. Watching the crowd at the Oracle conf. eat up Larry Ellison's huffery as through he was some kind of market visionary was the lesson at the other end of the spectrum, and it's that 'If you're rich and stand on stage and say something that 'sounds credible', a lot of people with just believe it'. Of course there's more to it than that. But this one is Comedy Gold. It might be a sign that Susan does not have a fully trusted team around her ... I would beg my boss in stark words to not do something so ridiculous to themselves.
- itronitron 5y agoIt also indicates to me that the leadership at Alphabet is totally out to lunch. I would have thought they had the sense to stop this but apparently not.
- dehrmann 5y agoYou mean the leadership that put Google cofounder Sergey Brin's sister-in-law in charge of Youtube?
- thu2111 5y agoAnd not only sister in law. Executive leader of that highly successful project, Google Video, which ended with Wojcicki being so beaten that she had to tell Google management to buy her only competitor for over a billion dollars.
- biofox 5y agoI recall Google Video being the better platform when it was first released. Had a clear interface, integrated with google search, and better performance. I have no idea how Google failed to gain the lead.
- GuB-42 5y agoIsn't it standard practice not to allow people involved in the process to participate? I mean, even if you deserve it, it is an obvious conflict of interest and makes the award worthless. I mean, if say, Tesla sponsors an electric car award and a Tesla car wins, it will sound like a farce. Even though it would be expected for a Tesla car to win an electric car award in an independent contest.
- mc32 5y agoAt least at radio stations they have the decency to not publicly allow their staff to win on-air prizes.
- jpdaigle 5y agoAs a child in the 80s/early 90s I played little league baseball. Our annual fundraising drive would get capped off by a random draw amongst all the players on the team, performed by the coach at home, and he'd tell us at the next game who won. Prize was 50$, a not-insignificant sum for 8 year olds in 1989! Sadly, child-me didn't realize that it was a tad fishy that the coach's son won the draw two years running. What fantastic luck!
- bilekas 5y agoCould this be related to the Dunning-Kruger Effect ? Seems incredible naive and maybe oblivious to the actions that are being taken by YouTube (correctly or not)..
- rubyist5eva 5y agoThis is a joke, right?
- whereis 5y agoYoutube's algo gaslighted me about the suicide of a childhood friend, by picking content that mocked his life after I learned the bad news. I had already curated my feed to two specific science topics, and the top rec was a blaring million IQ evil AI punching me in the gut with an Iron Fist. I've never been the same since. Florence Nightingale effect. People such as Wojcicki have poor moral compasses, or they aren't accountable.
- all2 5y agoI want to hear more about this.
- whereis 5y agoA childhood friend committed suicide, I found out, then the next day or so my science-curated youtube feed suddenly showed me a totally out of context video in the top spot with content that mocked my friend's life. It appeared as though google/youtube algos used the data point about my friend's suicide to perform a psychological experiment on me. At the least, this was amoral, but appeared malicious to me. I fail to see how it is ever appropriate to customize content based on the suicide of a friend. I would like to ask anyone here on hn who has the appropriate authority at Google to briefly investigate this incident: Why did google/youtube use the suicide of a childhood friend as a data point for personalizing content, what was the intention, and whether this has changed. Or, perhaps it would help to have an explanation as to why my understanding of this incident is incorrect.
- throwaway3699 5y agoThe simple answer is no algorithm is that smart. It's just picking up your "interests" and trying to tailor that. AFAIK people do try to tune recommender systems to avoid this but it's an inscrutable problem to solve with today's state-of-the-art.
- whereis 5y agoMy youtube feed had been purposely curated to two science topics for weeks prior. How does the suicide of a friend factor into an "interests" algo that all of a sudden overrides my customizations? I was not doing any searches etc for suicide at that point but I did learn of the suicide via SMS from someone who uses an Android phone. (likely infiltration point for google to initially gather the data point User.FriendsSuicide.WasInformed) I'm willing to accept the innocent explanation but not on conjecture. This was blatant and fucking hurt me badly and I haven't recovered since. It was the worst possible gaslighting. Recently: tweeting about my suicidal ideations and having twitter respond with personalized trends such as "He's dead" and "Rope" while shadowbanning me doesn't look good. Also recently: Facebook showing me a long string of county sheriffs as "people you may know" when a guy i knew long ago was scheduled to be released from a long term federal stint, doesnt look good either. Makes it clear that I've been on a "associate of bad guy" list since Season 6 Ep 12. Is it possible that some kind of social credit algos have been deployed by American tech companies, in a limited fashion? I suspect the architectural arrangements at big tech companies offers compartments for performing limited use-case experiments totally out of view of the rank and file engineers. By design, those ouside that clearance zone won't even know it exists. "CIA middleware" might be appropriate It seems unlikely to me that the google incident was just a random fluke based on my "interest" in learning of the suicide of a childhood friend. However, only google has the logs, data, and algorithms. I find it unlikely that Google will ever give a straight answer but to me its evidence that Google's data and algos need to be turned over to the justice dept. A big part of Google's power is their impunity to perform such experiments with total deniability. They are worth a trillion dollars yet any damage, incidental or intentional, inflicted on a user goes totally unchecked. Google is loyal to google/shareholders. They dont give a fsk about me, and I fully expect that no response is forthcoming. There's no accountability, and these services start to look more like public utilities. If it isnt transparent then any such malice can easily be played off with statements claiming that some kind of intelligence is needed for an algo to be malicious An algo doesn't have to be "smart" to gaslight a person. All you need is their personal data, especially intimate data such as: * Childhood bully's name * Subsequent taken name of your ex wife who you were heartbroken to lose * Suicide of a childhood friend * Other personals such as siblings' names Worse yet is rumors. An algo can use info related to rumors to gaslight a person. Just use keywords from the rumors for personalized content. None of this requires any complex algos. Just incompetence and/or malice.
- spaetzleesser 5y agoThey are learning from the entertainment industry. Industry insiders giving each other awards like the Grammy and Oscar.
- okareaman 5y agoThis feels like a clever ad campaign by YouTube trying too hard to be ironic because Susan Wojcicki might actually deserve it
- ttt0 5y agoA brief story of free expression on YouTube: At some point they implemented what they called a 'Limited state', which stripped almost every functionality, like comments, likes, embedding or sharing on videos that did not violate their ToS, but were simply disliked by YouTube. They removed it after a while, I assume because of Streisand effect, but I'm not sure. Then they changed their ToS that they could ban you for literally no reason whatsoever. They retracted that since as well, but are still doing basically just that, it just gives them plausible deniability I guess.
- TurkishPoptart 5y agoThis is the most Soviet thing I've heard in a while. The Ministry of Culture awards itself for upholding the Soviet principles of cultural enlightenment!
- um_ya 5y agoHonestly, I hope San Fran dissolves into the rest of the country. The mono-culture bubble in silicon valley is nauseating.
- christophilus 5y agoAs someone in the rest of the country, I hope it doesn’t.
- spiritplumber 5y agoKim Jong Un get 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponosred by North Korea
- imwillofficial 5y agoHow stunning and brave
- JoshTko 5y agoFor the past few months, my youtube recommendations have gone down noticeably in quality. I really wonder what management is prioritizing.
- rcurry 5y agoThat’s awesome. I worked for this one startup a long time ago where the CEO would call a company-wide meeting every other month to announce a new achievement award and then promptly award it to his co-founder. You can’t make this kind of shit up, it’s comedy gold. It was also great for morale every time we saw the cofounder get the use of the CEO’s Ferrari or that $25k bonus check. We were always so excited for him!
- 1cvmask 5y agoI think this might be the perfect definition of Circular Economy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_economy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circular_economy
- martin1975 5y agoIt's amazing how disconnected from reality Susan is... I don't think she even knows it. YouTube is probably the poster child for censorship in the context of genuinely free (1A-protected) speech. I have no idea how this self-stroking "award" can be taken seriously by those who actually monitor freedom of speech (excluding porn, which I don't consider 'speech').
- b0afc375b5 5y agoNot surprising considering YouTube Rewind (2018) currently has a like / dislike of 3 million / 19 million. What's surprising is they haven't disabled comments for that video. Kudos to them I guess.
- thu2111 5y agoHonestly I wonder if they even noticed. Based on reading comments under op-eds in newspapers I don't believe the executive or media class actually ever look at prole-feed like comments and like counts. The only YouTubers who might have noticed this don't have the power to yank videos and comments, not are they going to point them out to Wojcicki.
- kmeisthax 5y agoFirst Amendment wouldn't apply here unless you were to somehow bring something like the state actors doctrine into it. It only regulates government behavior. Strictly speaking under the First Amendment YouTube is incapable of censorship. Under a more expansive concept of free speech, where we include things like monopoly market power or illegal use of force as government action; then you could argue that YouTube does censor things due to their large size. It's genuinely difficult to start your own video site and speak without being buried in hosting fees; so I think it's useful to talk about them censoring things in some contexts. However, we've also strayed far away from the First Amendment. Outside of those concepts; however, I don't think the word "censorship" is very useful. If Hacker News decides to ban me, I can go to many thousands of other private forae in order to speak. Perhaps we should use the term "para-censorship" to refer to these situations in which third parties decide to refuse to do business with you.
- indymike 5y agoIt's always bad form to accept an award from your own company when you are CEO. You should be giving out the awards.
- aryanoes 5y agoHey just a small correction - It's not from her company, Youtube was a sponsor for the event not the ones running it
- brundolf 5y agohttps://youtu.be/ufCH2TNY3pw?t=117 https://youtu.be/ufCH2TNY3pw?t=117
- baremetal 5y agoupside down world. rewarding evil as if it is good. not surprised in the slightest. not sure why anyone here is..
- Paul-ish 5y agoYou have to wonder if everyone else offered the prize rejected it.
- bobthechef 5y agoIf Obama can win the Nobel Peace Prize...
- babesh 5y agoYou should watch the video of her accepting the award. She talks about censoring people for violating the terms of service and the four responsibilities, one of which is to their advertisers. All this in an acceptance speech for freedom of speech. Talk about digging your own hole.
- brailsafe 5y agoAbsolutely bizarre. It's so disconnected, I don't know what to make of it.
- babesh 5y agoI think it’s a power strut. Victors strutting and defining what is the truth. Somewhat common in corporate America and politics actually.
- roguas 5y agoYou would have to return to definition for 'freedom of speech'. There is a good chance that somebody may have very different concept of what it means. Someone can consider banning hateful speech as activity towards 'more' freedom of speech. I do not subscribe to this, but be aware that a lot of people are not willing to admit they are against freedom of speech, so they redefine the term.
- roguas 5y agoFurther. It is "Free Expression Award". So there is even no gymanstics required in definitions. "Free expression" is something that anybody can define any way as there is no contesting an idea that is not commonly recognized.
- readams 5y agoI think people here are fundamentally misunderstanding what happened here. There is a nonprofit, the "Freedom Forum Institute" that awarded this award. Only the award ceremony was sponsored by YouTube. It's common practice for nonprofits to use awards like this as an opportunity to ask for donations, and for the company associated with that person to offer to sponsor the awards ceremony. I don't see anything to indicate that this award was created by YouTube or that YouTube decided to award this to her.
- cwkoss 5y agoDoes the Freedom Forum Institute do societally beneficial things or are they just a prestige laundering service?
- racingmars 5y agoEven if you completely ignore whatever sponsorship YouTube has with the organization, the sheer idea of awarding YouTube a prize related to freedom of expression/freedom of speech is what's laughable. I suspect some people think the only possible reason YouTube could win this award is because of the sponsorship of the award ceremony. Because how else would you explain it?
- lupire 5y agoAn award that the recipient pays for isn't a meritorious award.
- piva00 5y agoEven more when the charitable foundation pays their CEO lavishly [0]. Pay to play seems to be quite in line of this institute's DNA. [0] http://gannettblog.blogspot.com/2013/11/as-freedom-forum-posted-another-48m.html http://gannettblog.blogspot.com/2013/11/as-freedom-forum-pos...
- userbinator 5y agoThe name "Freedom Forum Institute" itself sounds suspiciously doublespeak-ish, and makes me think it's actually a pro-censorship organisation.
- brailsafe 5y agoHer video accepting the award is the most delusional thing I've seen in a while, for the reasons everyone else mentioned in this thread. Bananas.
- cwkoss 5y agoSo... Youtube essentially just bought this award then right? Seems kind of pathetic...
- lizardmancan 5y agoHere the meaning and intended meaning align somwhat poorly.
- CivBase 5y agoFrom the award video: > How do you make sure that everybody has a voice but also feels safe? That question was never directly answered and, frankly, I don't think there it's possible to strike that balance. Even now there are simultaneously people who complain that their voice is denied or concealed on the platform while others who complain that the platform doesn't do enough to block or steer viewers away from problematic content. > We've always since the beginning of YouTube had community guidelines because we've realized that there's certain types of content... like some from the very beginning... we wouldn't allow adult content, hate content, dangerous content... all of those types of content could really make it that YouTube was no longer a platform that was viable for all these other voices out there. The terms she uses to describe content ("adult", "hate", and "dangerous") are all extremely vague - purposely so that YouTube can ban or allow content seemingly however it pleases them. And what does she even mean by those types of content could really make YouTube no longer viable for other voices? YouTube is just part of the web - a much larger platform which very much allows those types of content. That hasn't made other voices any less viable. Whether or not it should be YouTube's responsibility to silence those voices, their existence clearly does not inherently reduce the viability of other voices. > We're always updating our policies and when content is violative of any of the policies unfortunately we need to remove it. And so we removed 9 million videos last quarter and almost all of them - over 90% - we removed with machines, which is good because it means if there's content that's violative we find that really quickly. ... This is a "Free Expression" award, right? Am I playing the wrong video? > We also want to protect creators like you who have built businesses with really really valuable content and make sure that we don't have a situation where advertisers pull their spend because there's some content on it that they're not comfortable with. So we want to make sure that we're protecting all the valuable creators like you. Sure. You're protecting the creators. By demonetizing their businesses. Right.
- fidesomnes 5y agoCensorship is freedom to these Orwell inspired clowns.
- dudeinjapan 5y agoI nominate Kim Jong Un for the 2022 Free Expression award.
- christophilus 5y agoXi already bought the 2022 award. Sorry, Kim better luck next time.
- dudeinjapan 5y agoIn communist China, internet tube YOU!
- lovelyviking 5y agoWhat censorship you are talking about people? Russia sponsored trolls enjoy full freedom of expression on this platform even to bully,make fake accounts, threat, insult and delete comments that trying to argue with their lies and deliver the truth. If they disturb to russian aggressive propaganda machine and not overwhelmed by it then those comments are disappearing without any explanation/notification. If that is not a freedom of russian expression then what is? Hate, lies, propaganda are all fine as long as they are in Russian and support Moscow point of view. I heard that even the disputes in Russian are rerouted to Moscow office! Unfortunately Ukrainians do not have such freedoms, many comments are deleted, accounts are banned and many attempts to deliver the truth are prosecuted or overwhelmed by Moscow bots but since Moscow doesn't consider Ukrainians as people or humans with rights anyway I think it's ok in the eyes of Youtube's CEO (judging by the actions)? Or she simply doesn't know? I mean who would dare to censor Moscow point of view , it would be a censorship! Even if they already attacked Ukraine and gather huge army near the border to kill milllions. Who cares ... right? PS: Since I prognose downvoting desires I want you to pay attention, that Russian Bots is a huge problem. I've seen them acting in Russian, now they are using this technique in English speaking communities. Do not underestimate the threat. It's not a joke, they literally bully and shut up anyone who dare to oppose them. They work 24h so at some point you have no power to resist in your spare time to that machine. If you downvote this comment that tries to rise awareness of this huge problem because it's not entertaining, conser yourself helping to this propaganda machine and be sure soon it will come to you together with war, like it came to Ukraine in 2014. No one thought it would happen, just like this week many underestimate the real danger of a huge war to destroy young democracy in Ukraine.
- 8f2ab37a-ed6c 5y agoIs there any hard evidence for this bogeyman that gets regularly used as apologia? Or is this Pizzagate for folks on the left of the political spectrum?
- lovelyviking 5y agoOne of the troll farms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Research_Agency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Research_Agency You can see russian bots at action here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ec5oiJJqflQ&lc=UgwOALXptmHuSJssAQt4AaABAg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ec5oiJJqflQ&lc=UgwOALXptmHuS... I can spot them easily. Can you? (hint: they send predefined messages in diff. forms)
- pupdogg 5y agoI came to this thread solely to read comments and ensure that everyone is thinking what I’m thinking. Verdict? Sanity prevails!
- lovelyviking 5y agoBy the way, downvoting can be abused for censorship here. I think only upvoting has right to exist.
- EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK 5y agoI think you should take a little broader look, US is not the whole world. YouTube is the only channel where anti-government information is allowed in many countries, where government controls the mass media and censors the internet, but comes short of blocking Youtube, due to its popularity. Probably this is the reason why that prize has been awarded.
- olivermarks 5y ago'she emphasized the importance of free speech and the role that YouTube plays in protecting it'. Someone should get an irony award for that! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_(Time_Person_of_the_Year) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_(Time_Person_of_the_Year)
- freakynit 5y agoWhat the actual fuck!
- corona-research 5y ago...and Youtube deleted the Snowden interview with Vice where he warned that governments will misuse the pandemic to expand their systems of oppression.
- fergie 5y agoI cant wait to see the inevitable H3 take on this.
- snambi 5y agoWow... this is a different level.
- beshrkayali 5y agoIn the video, she calls speech they don’t agree with “censorship” and actual censorship “freedom of expression”. If this isn’t a prime example of doublespeak I don’t know what is. https://youtu.be/xDcvPf78g1k https://youtu.be/xDcvPf78g1k
- kreeben 5y agoShe's probably addressing her advertisers, not us, in order to ensure them that they have total freedom of expression of "facts about their wonderful products" in a world totally absent of vile critique. That YT is a safe haven, for them, so to speak.
- egberts1 5y agoWhat an awesome self-participation trophy, YouTube. So typify your entire company’s selectivity of content. /snark
- durnygbur 5y agoThe only thing missing in the youtube video of youtube ceo receiving youtube award are ads. Every few minutes it should be interrupted with unskippable ad of Coca Cola, Mercedes, Lays, and Iqos.
- sulmahabd 5y agowow!!!!
- paulcarroty 5y agoJust remembered how Youtube forced Blender community to left 'cause they don't wanna ads on their videos: https://www.blendernation.com/2018/06/19/blender-foundation-youtube-update/ https://www.blendernation.com/2018/06/19/blender-foundation-... 'Freedom Expression' isn't so cool without money, right, Google?
- chakhs 5y agoReminds me of Zimbabwe president Mugabe won the lottery organized by a national bank
- docmars 5y agoHeh, if that isn't the most hypocritical award given in a hot minute. That's the only thing I can say about this in good conscience. Susan: un-ban every political dissenter you've removed in the last 2 years and then we can talk.