On a side note, the creators of YouTube ought to [at least informally] unionize. There's no reason Adam Neely should be getting copyright "strikes" for explaining music to the masses, or Cody's Lab should be forced to take down videos on mining with explosives [on his family's ranch]. YouTube needs to have a hotline for problem solving for their most profitable content providers, and until the creators collectively hit the pocket book, they'll face these disruptive yet easily solvable problems.
YouTube is trying to reward “quality” content
11–20 of 293 posts
Re: YouTube is trying to reward “quality” content
#12> Creating the right metric for success could help marginalize videos that are inappropriate, or popular among small but active communities with extreme views. So, deplatform what's not mainstream, accepted by the establishment, favorable to Google...
I don't think that deplatform is the right idea here. Presumably, the videos will still be present and watchable. However, the algorithms used to sort and present videos must be seen as playing an editorial role, and that brings a different set of questions.
That is the equivalent of deplatforming in a lot of ways, especially on youtube where millions of videos are uploaded daily. If your videos are not suggested, and do not show up high in trending or search results, then they practically don't exist except from word of mouth and outside promotion.
Re: YouTube is trying to reward “quality” content
#13It this point, they should just be regulated by the various world governments.
Though I don't like a world where google can override a given countries law, or googles tries to solve the issue for union of all the worlds government laws.
I also don't like the possibilites of hidden metrics driving things that have such huge social implications.
Re: YouTube is trying to reward “quality” content
#14> Creating the right metric for success could help marginalize videos that are inappropriate, or popular among small but active communities with extreme views. So, deplatform what's not mainstream, accepted by the establishment, favorable to Google...
I don't think that deplatform is the right idea here. Presumably, the videos will still be present and watchable. However, the algorithms used to sort and present videos must be seen as playing an editorial role, and that brings a different set of questions.
Yeah. After all, novel ideas and iconic communities usually start small and annoy the heck of the status quo.
It's so easy to put them in the same bag as the stereotypes of bad people.
Re: YouTube is trying to reward “quality” content
#15On a side note, the creators of YouTube ought to [at least informally] unionize. There's no reason Adam Neely should be getting copyright "strikes" for explaining music to the masses, or Cody's Lab should be forced to take down videos on mining with explosives [on his family's ranch]. YouTube needs to have a hotline for problem solving for their most profitable content providers, and until the creators collectively h…
This is an interesting idea. The nature of the work of youtubers parallels with the work of Hollywood actors, someone might want to organize Screen Actors Guild for youtube creators.
Re: YouTube is trying to reward “quality” content
#16How designed responsibility isn't censorship?
Re: YouTube is trying to reward “quality” content
#17I like the intention, and I hope to see more of this... but it's kind of hard to imagine that the end goal here is "Responsibility", when the business goal is "how many ads can we sell?"
The purpose of ads is not just eyeballs. It's to get people to buy a product. If a lot of kids that watch YouTube all day see a Nike ad, it doesn't mean they'll buy sneakers.
There are more and more people that do nothing but be on the internet all day. Advertisers don't want those people, they want social people that watch YouTube on the side, and are likely to buy products too.
Re: YouTube is trying to reward “quality” content
#18I like the intention, and I hope to see more of this... but it's kind of hard to imagine that the end goal here is "Responsibility", when the business goal is "how many ads can we sell?"
Valid concerns. What does Google gain from putting genuine effort into stopping the spread of these kinds of video? Perhaps more "responsible" content and an eventual turn-around of the platform... But that's a big gamble - may take years, may never happen.
In the meantime, they're bleeding man hours, money, ad impressions, perhaps advertisers targeting the audiences which are being culled.
Now examine the question: What does Google have to gain by appearing to put a genuine effort into this while not actually addressing the problem?
They gain a whole lot more than in the first scenario - new users hopeful of an increase in quality, support from privacy and attention-span advocates, insight into how they can influence, suppress, or promote certain themes going forward, more metrics to become more entrenched in the data harvesting machine learning game...
Re: YouTube is trying to reward “quality” content
#19Frankly, I hope YouTube (and Google in general) dramatically overdo it with the censorship, "curation", and deplatforming of "irresponsible" content, purely so that it forces an independent, non-corporate model to be developed.
Having one company be the sole gatekeeper for the overwhelming majority of the web's video content is not a solution.
Re: YouTube is trying to reward “quality” content
#20> Creating the right metric for success could help marginalize videos that are inappropriate, or popular among small but active communities with extreme views. So, deplatform what's not mainstream, accepted by the establishment, favorable to Google...
I don't think that deplatform is the right idea here. Presumably, the videos will still be present and watchable. However, the algorithms used to sort and present videos must be seen as playing an editorial role, and that brings a different set of questions.
Deplatforming via obscurity?