3 ms·

This is not a good comparison. Youtube without censorship wouldn't look any different to you, unless you are interested in the kind of stuff that now gets censo

This is not a good comparison. Youtube without censorship wouldn't look any different to you, unless you are interested in the kind of stuff that now gets censored. Remember that youtube had barely any censorship for a long time. Did your recommendations look like 4chan then? The reason 4chan looks the way it does is the bumping algorithm, which promotes controversial posts, not just the lack of censorship. A platform where the frontpage is based on a recommendation algorithm wouldn't look like that, and in fact didn't look like that before it started censoring at this scale.

swiley 5y ago
You should always watch youtube in private mode so you don't get pigeonholed.
mr_toad 5y ago
YouTube without censorship would turn into PornHub in about as long as it takes to upload a new video.
paulpauper 5y ago
Right. I think part of the problem is the recommendation algo. Reputable brands do not want their videos to be linked to more questionable content . The problem is, extreme political stuff does not generate much $, so YouTube does not stand to lose much much by purging it.
- 63 5y ago
  I understand what that argument is asserting and I'm sure that brands believe it, but as a consumer of YouTube content I just don't think it's true. I have absolutely no association between the YouTube ad that plays and the content of the video. Maybe children and older people used to traditional tv make that association? I just find the whole argument frustrating personally.
  - mbg721 5y ago
    The companies that buy ads are vain and obsessed with cultivating a brand image, and Google is more than happy to indulge them. It doesn't matter that nobody is actually going to get outraged and stop shopping at (e.g.) TJ Maxx just because a game streamer said the word "die", it only matters that TJ Maxx bought the ad and the managers can be reassured that they've mitigated their risk.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
  - hytdstd 5y ago
    A majority of respondents disagree with you. Advertising placed next to offensive content has a negative effect on brand perception. https://www.statista.com/statistics/698821/influence-offensive-content-brand-image-usa/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/698821/influence-offensi...
grayfaced 5y ago
Without moderation youtube is unusable. It would be a defunct site within months.
- shard972 5y ago
  how did it even survive for over a decade dumbass?
- nradov 5y ago
  How would it be unusable? I would still be able to click on links and watch videos.
  - Jcowell 5y ago
    If you could find the links and videos you want. An unmoderated IOU to the work kid be overrun with porn in seconds because 1. It’s YouTube and to upload porn at what was once a forbidden place is very appeal 2. Where porn can fit , porn will go.
hytdstd 5y ago
Youtube has actually always had censorship. I found this from 2006: > What kind of videos can I upload? >> We accept any type of video content as long as it does not contain: >>> Pornography or obscene material >>> Copyrighted content (unless you own all the necessary rights) >>> Hate or graphically violent acts

swiley 5y ago

You should always watch youtube in private mode so you don't get pigeonholed.

mr_toad 5y ago

YouTube without censorship would turn into PornHub in about as long as it takes to upload a new video.

paulpauper 5y ago

Right. I think part of the problem is the recommendation algo. Reputable brands do not want their videos to be linked to more questionable content . The problem is, extreme political stuff does not generate much $, so YouTube does not stand to lose much much by purging it.

63 5y ago
I understand what that argument is asserting and I'm sure that brands believe it, but as a consumer of YouTube content I just don't think it's true. I have absolutely no association between the YouTube ad that plays and the content of the video. Maybe children and older people used to traditional tv make that association? I just find the whole argument frustrating personally.
- mbg721 5y ago
  The companies that buy ads are vain and obsessed with cultivating a brand image, and Google is more than happy to indulge them. It doesn't matter that nobody is actually going to get outraged and stop shopping at (e.g.) TJ Maxx just because a game streamer said the word "die", it only matters that TJ Maxx bought the ad and the managers can be reassured that they've mitigated their risk.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- hytdstd 5y ago
  A majority of respondents disagree with you. Advertising placed next to offensive content has a negative effect on brand perception. https://www.statista.com/statistics/698821/influence-offensive-content-brand-image-usa/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/698821/influence-offensi...

grayfaced 5y ago

Without moderation youtube is unusable. It would be a defunct site within months.

shard972 5y ago
how did it even survive for over a decade dumbass?
nradov 5y ago
How would it be unusable? I would still be able to click on links and watch videos.
- Jcowell 5y ago
  If you could find the links and videos you want. An unmoderated IOU to the work kid be overrun with porn in seconds because 1. It’s YouTube and to upload porn at what was once a forbidden place is very appeal 2. Where porn can fit , porn will go.

hytdstd 5y ago

Youtube has actually always had censorship. I found this from 2006: > What kind of videos can I upload? >> We accept any type of video content as long as it does not contain: >>> Pornography or obscene material >>> Copyrighted content (unless you own all the necessary rights) >>> Hate or graphically violent acts