How convenient to claim some kind of nefariousness when the deed is seems directed towards an ideological compatriot, eh? Except it also happens to some YouTubers' on the left, but those folks can't get their story published by the Wall Street Journal ("Thank you, Rupert Murdock.")Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Jeff Bezos once brilliantly pointed out that a shockingly high percentage of users closed the window and left the site for each additional click.How hard is that??? And why should Google make that 18+ content free for anyone to see if they don't want to sign in using a Google account???
That's actually one of many tricks that YouTube uses to censor right-wing content.
Among the tricks:
- Removing videos for flimsy "content violations".
- Making the video rate poorly in searches, even if far more popular than other videos which come up earlier in the search results.
- Restricting videos to "adults" who are logged in and listed as 18+. On the surface, this seems reasonable, but in reality it creates an extra step to view the video -- one which many YouTube viewers don't want to deal with (many people aren't logged into a google account). Again, the standards for restricting such videos vary depending upon the political views expressed.
After the recent James Damore debacle, do you really think it's unlikely that Google has built in biases against conservatives?
They already did it during the election. During the concerns about Hillary's health (when she fainted in the blistering 74 degree heat), searches for "Hillary Clinton health" came up with nothing in the auto-fill. Instead, it kept trying to suggest "Hillary Clinton healthcare".
There were tons of examples like this.
YouTube is no different.
Also, the content was restricted based on flagging by users who watched the videos.
Ease of use and access is of extreme importance when it comes to having a successful website.
This is exactly why people were so frustrated with wsop.com last year when they demanded people connect their social media in order to read WSOP updates. Not only was that intrusive, but it was introducing another step which many people weren't going to bother doing.
I will be honest. If I'm not logged in to Google, and if I run into a video requiring signing in, I just forego watching it, unless I really want to see it.
The "forced login for 18+ content" is one of several dirty tricks used by Google to push the numbers down on conservative-leaning videos.
I also don't believe your explanation that this was automatically triggered by flagging. I believe Google might claim that, but I don't believe it's the reason. And if it is the reason, Google needs to review such flagging and make sure it's accurate.
Categorizing Dennis Prager of all people as "adult" is just LOL.
And you are forgetting something: The flagging is done by the *viewers*, not Google. If a video is given enough flags, YouTube automatically restricts access unless the YouTuber complains and gets YouTube to remove the restriction. The technology isn't perfect, and is probably designed to err on the side of caution.
And it is entirely possible that some fans of Prager's material looking to make hay over a claim that leftist Google is intentionally trying to censor Prager's material worked together to get some of the videos flagged enough to trigger Google's automatic restriction. Heck! Prager could have organized it himself!
Psst! See how easy it is to create a conspiratorial narrative to make ideological foes seem underhanded? (Cue FPS_Russia to post one of his ridic videos.)
Reply With Quote
