You're viewing a single thread.
I like algorithms giving me suggestions in all sorts of ways, but not shady ones. None of the people around me seem to mind, but I worry about a company like Google strongly influencing what information we consume. Even if they didn't use this influence, it's dangerous to have them in the position where they could.
Alphabet also shapes what content creators are most likely to create by demonetizing controversial or dissenting videos.
"Dissenting" here meaning using a swear word within 1 minute of an ad break, videos under a set length, and new content not dropping every week, in addition to what you normally think the word dissenting means
A lot of the most popular YouTube creators only post every few months and their content always gets plenty of impressions
They have a rule about not swearing at the start of a video because of the auto play feature and various accessibility tools, having it is probably better than the result of not having it.
I regularly get offered videos of all lengths including variations of mr skellybones that are between 8 and 15 seconds, though since shorts were added those are normally uploaded there now. Yes shorter videos earn less money and yes of course they do, why wouldn't they? If lord of the rings was two minutes long then I I imagine the box set would be cheaper.
Creators have repeatedly spoken about how their videos and channels get suppressed priority if their videos arent released on a regular rapid timeline. Massive creators with huge followings can push through that by way of having insanely large fanbases who have notifications turned on. That does not change the facts of youtubes prioritization system.
Thats a nonsense excuse, because the autoplay doesnt pause at 2 minutes, and swearing within the time limit doesnt take you out of potential autoplay queue. Its because advertisers dont want swears in proximity to their ads, which is why the video gets demonetized. Youtube themselves said this when they established the policy.
Ok. And? That means literally nothing, youtube pays creators signifigantly less for not meeting the 10 min mark even when the number of ads run is not different. No one gives a shit what you were reccomended. Youtube still runs the same number of ads on 4-9 minute videos while paying the channel less for not crossing the threshold.
Yeah that too. But I mostly meant a mostly opaque list of keywords that get you demonetized, and it's possible that there is an AI that assesses how likely a video is to put a viewer in a "click ad mood" or how likely it is to keep viewers watching. Unfortunately I don't know exactly how it works, but if they do this, I assume they also do a whole lot more subtle things.
Controversial videos might actually do fine if they keep viewer watching and clicking on ads. But many things critical of the current consumerist and propaganda model at least gets a chilling effect. Creators know this is more work so many would avoid it. And some might not be able to make a living even though their content would be valuable for society and drop out.
So alphabet (massively) shapes the content our society sees the tube.
Honestly, the only social media i clearly see this is instagram and their comments. They sort by controversial to get engagement and an emotional response and affects my mood negatively tremendously (can't find a single clip with a woman that doesn't have a misogynistic comment in top10). TikTok is heaven for me in comparison, it's my happy place.
shady Hah
You have the correct idea, but it's way too late for most people. This "pre-selection" made by most services have been in place for a long while, and these days people even complains when they are not fed with it.
It is a sad state of affair; thankfully at some point enough people might move away from these automated suggestions, but I'm not holding my breath.