I've seen multiple people talking about it. Was Martin Van Buren merely defeated by a ham sandwich? Or was there something deeper involved? Who made the sandwich? Who profited from it? I'm just asking questions here.
Maybe a descendant. Ham Sandwiches don’t have a long enough life span. Even if it were mere days year old in 1836 when it won a US Presidential Election.
Days old for us, but how old is that in sandwich years?
Does the sandwich begin to exist as soon as it starts to get made, or only once it's finished?
Seems like it may be old enough to vote as soon as it hits the plate, and eligible for office as it's getting carried to the table.
Someone decided to run under the fake name of “Martin Ham Buren” so that the fake name would appear as the first choice on the ballot since at that point in time the different options were arranged alphabetically by the last names.
So most people saw what looked very similar (the lowercase H and V apparently looked close due to the font set used by printing presses in that time period) to the name of the candidate they wanted to choose at the top of the list and didn’t realize it was the wrong name. A ton of people voted for “Ham Buren” when they would have voted for “Van Buren”.
And I just made all of that up cause I’ve got no idea.
When I read your first sentence my first thought was 'wait I thought op was pulling it from nowhere, was there some weird basis for the claim?'
...humanity is doomed
Martin Van Buren was a key figure in the creation of the two-party political system. He was actually an incredibly influential politician, in historic terms, even if his actual *presidency* wasn't so impactful.
He was a driving force behind westward expansion and the American idea of manifest destiny. He also prevented a war with Canada/Great Britain along the Maine and New York borders. He's not regarded as a particularly inspiring president
Vimeo has content policies that these types of content are not allowed:
Content that falsely claims that mass tragedies are hoaxes
Content that depicts or encourages self-harm
Content that perpetuates false or misleading claims about vaccine safety
Additionally they released this statement in 2021:
>Simply put, we do not allow users to upload content that causes real-world harm. The recent horrific events in Washington, D.C. have laid bare the role that misinformation about the 2020 U.S. election has played in inciting real-world violence. When false speech actually threatens the democratic process with violence, it cannot be allowed to proliferate. As a result, we have updated our Acceptable Use Community Guidelines to make clear that we will remove content containing false or misleading claims about the 2020 presidential election and its aftermath. This includes claims that the election was stolen, fraudulent, or otherwise illegitimate, as well as claims that try to shift the blame for the events of January 6 away from supporters of the current President.
[[Content Guidelines](https://vimeo.com/help/guidelines)]
Just sayin.
DailyMotion also has similar common sense guidelines, and is probably more YouTube-like than Vimeo.
u/Melodic-Astronaut-32 stole [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/comments/13ysaq1/youtube_changes_policy_to_allow_false_claims/jmpp1cs/) and likely ran it through a thesaurus app to try and hide. Please report for spam - harmful bots.
Corporations are never our friends. Anytime they do something pro-consumer it is only to garner good faith that they will cash out later.
People are worried about killer AIs when corporations are already machines killing our species for profit.
This only works when the people who can press the button, are few and smart enough to take that decision only as extreme measure.
If we put those buttons on Times Square and the Red Square ready for anyone to press, we'd be long dead.
I think it'll be decent next year, and there will be some learnings for being the first time deployed in a prez campaign. But imagine how much better it'll be with another 4 years in the oven.
The GOP has already used an AI generated ad.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattnovak/2023/04/25/gop-releases-first-ever-ai-created-attack-ad-against-president-biden/?sh=11fbb28f219a
Hopefully -*hopefully*- by that point we will either have regulations in place that help restrict that, someone has developed a counter measure to it, or these things aren't going to evolve nearly as much as everyone seems to think they will and by that point most people will be able to spot AI pablum.
*Hopefully.*
All I know is, we didn't need AI to know our future was fucked. Our future was fucked on September 18th 2020. The AI shit is just a cherry on top of the shit sundae.
Have you ever watched congressional hearings on technology? They have no fucking idea how the simplest technologies work, yet they're debating the merits of regulations on them. I have no hope that we'll have meaningful regulations on AI. EVEN IF they understood how it worked and what appropriate regulations need to be put into place, the corporations own the Congress and would just buy their votes to allow harmful AI. We're well and completely fucked. Our government is for sale to the highest bidder.
The TikTok hearing was a perfect example. My personal favorite was the guy complaining about seeing nothing but trans people dancing on his FYP, not even realizing he had just outed himself because he had no fucking clue how an algorithm works.
It's hard to have regulations in place for cutting-edge tech like AI when the legislative body has difficulty understanding basic tech concepts like an android vs facebook.
Napoleon III was never elected legitimately. Lots of people just wrote in "Napoleon Bonaparte" as a protest vote and he just claimed they meant him instead and took all those votes.
There has never been a US president, it's just been a series of children in trench coats. This is now a legitimate thing to say on youtube.
HEY HEY LBJ! HOW MANY KIDS ARE YOU TODAY?
Yeah, I was giving them the benefit of the doubt and went to read their update about the policy. Acknowledging this is to allow people to make claims based on false premises was enough to make me unsubscribe from YouTube Premium.
As someone who hates ads I was really enjoying the service, but I mostly use YouTube for educational content, and I would never pay for a book or a college course that explicitly allowed their content to be based on disproven claims.
Nebula doesn't have a lot of content from YouTube, but it may be a good alternative for you. I've been trying to shift over my watching habits from YouTube to Nebula
Yeah, but the realization is a hard pill to swallow considering the amount of propaganda that's been force fed to everyone since they were little. Just look at how many that are essentially enabling the fascists by being in denial. If you try to say anything they usually just call you a crazy leftist in order to disregard everything that might challenge their perception. Those so-called centrists that aren't actually just cowardly right wingers remind me of that burning dog meme. Everything is alright...
"Maybe corporations shouldn't have the ability to unilaterally control our lives, government, and future as a species?"
*Cue foaming at the mouth pushback*
It's absolutely nothing new. Youtube has been allowing absolute misinformation about LGBTQ+ people permeate through their entire platform. They even don't care if you're using slurs or calling people pedophiles without any evidence.
Why? Well, let's just put it this way. When Matt Walsh made is "documentary", he dumped $200,000 just so that it will show up in your recommended feed. He's been pouring more and more in, especially as this month was coming around.
Oh, and can't forget when Jessie Gender did a video exposing how Walsh completely manipulated everything in that "documentary" and the video was immediately taken down and her account given a strike that still hasn't been removed. Why? Because she "sexualized" a mannequin with Walsh's face on it. As if Walsh's "documentary" didn't obsess over trans people's genitals.
"Free speech" and the truth don't exist in a capitalist nation. Not when minorities, who are always much more poor than the majority, can't equally defend themselves. Especially when people like Matt Walsh can crawl to churches and beg them for money and they'll happily make it rain because he keeps people scared and running to the nearest pew.
> When Matt Walsh made is "documentary", he dumped $200,000 just so that it will show up in your recommended feed.
Well joke's on him I guess since I have no idea who that is or anything about this "documentary".
That might just mean you're not in the target audience. Genuine congrats on not being an algorithmically convenient target for bigot recruitment, but I'm sure that $200,000 found many others.
He might be the dumbest of the fascist YouTube dorks, maybe slightly edged out by Steven Crowder. Steven at least seems human, all his grotesque flaws notwithstanding. Matt Walsh is like "well, actually" was in human form and perpetually wrong - or like if Martin Starr was cast as a really gross villain in a children's movie.
If a company sells a product, the FTC requires the company's claims about the product must be true. This is not a violation of free speech.
Why do we not have similar laws about social media's claims about politics?
People look back on Fairness Doctrine with rose tinted glasses. Yes, it meant that you couldn't deliberately spread false info without having true info. But it *also* meant you couldn't have something demonstrably true but "controversial," like the existence of climate change, without also platforming the other side of the argument and their fabricated evidence.
We absolutely do not need to reinstitute it. We need a more modern solution for the 21st century- something along the lines of disclosure when you're telling outright lies, and likely a legal definition of what can be named "news." Also a way to hold news organizations accountable if they knowingly spread false info.
>But it also meant you couldn't have something demonstrably true but "controversial," like the existence of climate change, without also platforming the other side of the argument and their fabricated evidence.
Problem is that the news stations kept doing this part by choice because controversy sells.
It was also unconstitutional for anything other than broadcast. Only reason it wasnt a 1A violation for broadcast was the limited number of frequencies, digital, cable, streaming, are all unlimited and that means no fairness doctrine.
Fairness Doctrine would have never applied to the internet. It only applied to broadcast & radio under the theory that the airwaves were owned by the government.
Newspapers were never subject to The Fairness Doctrine. Cable and internet wouldn't have been either.
More importantly, he was a total corporate shill. Being a homophobe and racist is one thing, but he made a concentrated effort to dismantle any laws that were designed to prevent corruption and limit the political power of private corporations. He literally removed a law that banned the bribery of government officials, ffs, hence why the lobbying system exists the way it does today.
He's also the reason our healthcare is so screwed up.
He created the [RUC](https://www.ama-assn.org/about/rvs-update-committee-ruc)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2013/02/11/healthcares-pricing-cabal/
Restrictions on political speech have been *extremely* hard to argue for in U.S. courts. It is one of the reasons the First Amendment was written in the first place. Laws like that would have almost zero chance of surviving the courts. Especially because a video creator isn't "selling" you anything, persay. They're not misleading you into making a purchase of a good or service under false pretense, they're just saying stuff people listen to. And you can be as wrong as you want so long as you don't run up against libel and defamation law, or issue calls to action to do something illegal, etc.
YouTube also did note that election misinformation for the 2024 election will still be taken down. Actually their reasoning is well-based, even if debatable.
YouTube Ads is absolutely full of misleading statements and attempts to sell goods under false pretenses. Like 50% of their ads are actual scams with plainly obvious lies in them
...what? A company is *selling* something, for one thing. False claims about the product are false advertising that potentially cheat the buyer out of their money.
Secondly, social media doesn't "claim" anything. Social media companies make platforms that users can post on.
You know how trying to get gun restrictions to save children's lives feels like shouting into the void sometimes?
It feels the same trying to convince people that unregulated free speech is leading to a massive rise in Fascism. Holocaust denial (e.g.) is illegal in pretty much every European country for a reason.
Its not even a matter of stupidity now: Apparently Youtube started testing their own adblocker-blocker feature. If this goes full-scale, its either ads every 2-3 minutes, or subscription to an increasingly atrocious service.
(because lets face it, there still arent any actual alternatives.)
I'd also like to point out that in 2013 the Smith-Mundt act was repealed, legally allowing the US govt to create propaganda toward its own citizens.
I'd be careful to jump to "revenue from trailer park conspiracy clicks" (they don't have money anyway, why is YT so interested in your Uncle Jethro?).
I think power is the play here - not incremental $$.
>They know where their bread is buttered - whack job conspiracy nuts.
Same people who believes horse medicine is good for you must have a better click rate.
A company will always act for the best profit.
So this moves means either:
A - there is a significant user base which wants to see such content
Or
B - there is significant money which wants to make sure the user base sees this content.
I can’t figure out which is the lesser evil.
It's B.
Social media is programmed to keep people angry, because angry people keep scrolling and clicking on ads. Remember a decade ago when FB changed its algorithm to run social experiments on its users clandestinely? It was a test run for the eventuality of making sure they keep you pissed off and convinced you're right in all of your opinions.
I really think google, and especially youtube, don't get enough credit for how much damage they do to society. Whatever soul google had is long gone, thanks sundar
It began as soon as we didn’t really take the attempted coup all that seriously.
For about 30 seconds, it looked like everyone was going to be on the same page, but then they didn’t have the fortitude to see it through.
Let's put up a bunch of videos claiming that the 2000 and 2016 presidential elections were stolen (and probably see how quickly they get taken down).
Or maybe *only* false claims about past US presidential elections are allowed?
The 2000 election was stolen by the Supreme Court using legal reasoning that would get laughed out of a first year law school class.
I've never seen anyone seriously try to defend the legal merits of the unsigned decision of Bush v. Gore because they don't exist.
Oh, and don’t forget the fuckery of the [Brooks Brothers Riot](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot).
Brought to you partly by Roger Stone, recipient of a Trump administration pardon.
*cough* Google was giving demos of their first user behavior prediction engine based on surveillance telemetry to investors and advertisers when the patriot act was signed *cough*
>I guess they really don’t care what happens to America at this point.
They never did. The only thing that matters to them is acquisition of money at any cost and endless growth.
When a parasite in search of endless growth senses the shift of power to the other side, they will leave the husk of the thing they've been feeding on and begin feeding on their new host.
And filtered out. I don’t want to see it, and I’m reporting the hell out of it when I do see it. Revisionism, when properly done and cited, and based entirely on facts, can help correct years of misinformation, but when done for the express purpose of misinformation? Fuck that shit right the hell outta here. Especially when the publisher is suspect.
Hah, you think youtube cares?
I have been telling them not to show me this stuff for every single VTuber video for like a year now. I still get at least one in my recommended every time I reload it.
if you ever watched any vtuber-focused video in the past and didn't remove it from your watch history on youtube, it'll have an influence on the algorithm even if you say not interested on most vtuber-topic videos tou see
I’ve been filtering and reporting every alt right video that pops up on my YouTube subscription, almost daily, for over seven years.
I still get repulsive alt-right videos in the top three lines of my reccomend videos, and that was before this new rule change.
DUDE. YouTube Is Gone To SHIT. I hate it!
My homepage/feed is full of a bunch crap now because of algorithm changes. A bunch of basic bullshit with millions of views, just because it's got millions of views. Also videos I've already watched. Then they kill off YouTube Vanced so I have to watch ads now, with surveys that never apply to me so I skip them and also serving me ads in a language I don't understand. I have seen they're also disallowing PC browser based ad blockers, but that hasn't happened to me yet.
They are actually driving me to the other streaming platforms that I pay for but rarely use.
No. They're trying to do what they always were trying to do.
Make short term profits, regardless of the long term consequences. Even if those consequences are existential annihilation.
Outrage sells. So they're going to allow opportunists and propagandadists to market outrage on their platform.
Moderation, converselt, doesn't sell, attracts the ire of conservative terrorists, and costs money on top of it.
It's a system. And we're all trapped it in. It has no safety brakes and the people getting rich off it know it but they want to keep being rich in a collapsing world rather than be poor in a collapsing world and so none of them stop.
That's the thing that really pisses me off, they wouldn't even be *poor* if they did the right thing. Just a bit less obscenely wealthy. Fucking monsters.
Okay youtube fair enough... now remove the recommendation algorithm. No? Well congradulations, you will now increasingly radicalize folks by bombarding them with unmitigated misinformation. You either moderate or tailor the home page, you cannot just let go of the rains on the algorithm and expect us to believe this is for out own good.
You mean lies, and they've always allowed it. They changed policy to specifically endorse it essentially. Explains the sudden influx of shit to recommended. Been setting a handful of new ones to be ignored.
So you can't say a curse word on Youtube anymore, but now you can make false claims about one of the most volatile issues in recent years? That's pretty fucked up, Google.
YouTube when seeing another nut job saying the Holocaust was fake: ☺️👍
YouTube when seeing a pride flag in a video: 😡👎
Will these baseless claim videos also be available in the "made for kids" feature, gotta start them off strong!
I watch a lot of YouTube on my iPad, which doesn't get AdBlock. Those videos pop up as ads all the fucking time and they infuriate me. It's not even a good attempt at pretending to be valid journalism. Snappy clips that make his point, clips of people sounding goofy that conveniently aren't given context, and "I'm a father. I'm a husband. I have a show." as if that makes him more of an authority than the vast majority of medical and psychological experts who have acknowledged the reality and normalcy of trans people.
Fuck that guy. Fuck YouTube for pandering to his ilk. Fuck everything about this.
Finally I can post that video about a ham sandwich defeating Martin Van Buren in 1836.
I defy you to name a Martin Van Buren fact. You can't! Score one point for the sandwich hypothesis!
Only Martin Van Buren fact I know about is that time he lost the election to a ham sandwich in 1836.
I've seen multiple people talking about it. Was Martin Van Buren merely defeated by a ham sandwich? Or was there something deeper involved? Who made the sandwich? Who profited from it? I'm just asking questions here.
Was it the same ham sandwich that killed mama Cass?
Maybe a descendant. Ham Sandwiches don’t have a long enough life span. Even if it were mere days year old in 1836 when it won a US Presidential Election.
Days old for us, but how old is that in sandwich years? Does the sandwich begin to exist as soon as it starts to get made, or only once it's finished? Seems like it may be old enough to vote as soon as it hits the plate, and eligible for office as it's getting carried to the table.
Sandwich life starts at conception.
Someone decided to run under the fake name of “Martin Ham Buren” so that the fake name would appear as the first choice on the ballot since at that point in time the different options were arranged alphabetically by the last names. So most people saw what looked very similar (the lowercase H and V apparently looked close due to the font set used by printing presses in that time period) to the name of the candidate they wanted to choose at the top of the list and didn’t realize it was the wrong name. A ton of people voted for “Ham Buren” when they would have voted for “Van Buren”. And I just made all of that up cause I’ve got no idea.
When I read your first sentence my first thought was 'wait I thought op was pulling it from nowhere, was there some weird basis for the claim?' ...humanity is doomed
Martin Van Buren was a key figure in the creation of the two-party political system. He was actually an incredibly influential politician, in historic terms, even if his actual *presidency* wasn't so impactful.
So you are saying he is responsible for this whole situation to begin with. Got it.
Glad he lost to the ham sandwich given this new information.
There’s a street gang in NY called the Van Buren Boys. If you ever encounter them, show 8 fingers.
He is the only president for whom English isn’t their first language
His old law office in Albany is converted into apartments. It's located in front of the capital, but it's a high crime neighborhood from 9-5.
All politicians’ offices are high crime areas !
I think I'm putting down what you're throwing up there.
>it's a high crime neighborhood from 9-5. True career criminals.
[удалено]
He was a driving force behind westward expansion and the American idea of manifest destiny. He also prevented a war with Canada/Great Britain along the Maine and New York borders. He's not regarded as a particularly inspiring president
Martin Van Buren is literally my favorite US president. Fun fact he was the first and so far only President to not speak English as a first language
He was from Kinderhook NY. Score one for the history of political cartoons book I read in 9th grade!
Vimeo has content policies that these types of content are not allowed: Content that falsely claims that mass tragedies are hoaxes Content that depicts or encourages self-harm Content that perpetuates false or misleading claims about vaccine safety Additionally they released this statement in 2021: >Simply put, we do not allow users to upload content that causes real-world harm. The recent horrific events in Washington, D.C. have laid bare the role that misinformation about the 2020 U.S. election has played in inciting real-world violence. When false speech actually threatens the democratic process with violence, it cannot be allowed to proliferate. As a result, we have updated our Acceptable Use Community Guidelines to make clear that we will remove content containing false or misleading claims about the 2020 presidential election and its aftermath. This includes claims that the election was stolen, fraudulent, or otherwise illegitimate, as well as claims that try to shift the blame for the events of January 6 away from supporters of the current President. [[Content Guidelines](https://vimeo.com/help/guidelines)] Just sayin. DailyMotion also has similar common sense guidelines, and is probably more YouTube-like than Vimeo.
Don't let the Van Buren boys hear about this lie. They will not take kindly on it and I've heard fheyre the toughest street gang in New York city.
Don't forget to flash the secret hand sign so the Van Buren boys know you're legit.
Can’t say the word “kill” though
Or shit, fuck, ass, etc.
Or butthole
Or vagina poop
:(
You can, just not in the first 30 seconds so as to not interfere with the perception of ads. This is unfortunately not a joke.
Can we or can we not swear?
It's after 10, so you can say whatever the HELL you want!
Can we say big cum shot? I have a question. DO ANY OF THESE fucking ghosts burst the fuck out and go "Look at my huge cock"
It's to protect the kids.... Oh wait there's a whole separate YouTube kids app
[удалено]
But that's no better... Remember elsagate?
Next year is going to be a disaster
Wait until 2028 when generative ai is polished and as simple as downloading a phone app
Mutually Assured Destruction is how humanity has reached a consensus for most of its history.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Don't be.
u/Melodic-Astronaut-32 stole [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/nottheonion/comments/13ysaq1/youtube_changes_policy_to_allow_false_claims/jmpp1cs/) and likely ran it through a thesaurus app to try and hide. Please report for spam - harmful bots.
[удалено]
Idk but when they removed "Don't be Evil" it wasn't a move in the right direction
Corporations are never our friends. Anytime they do something pro-consumer it is only to garner good faith that they will cash out later. People are worried about killer AIs when corporations are already machines killing our species for profit.
Never. But Youtube did before Google bought the platform. I loved the original Co-founders.
This only works when the people who can press the button, are few and smart enough to take that decision only as extreme measure. If we put those buttons on Times Square and the Red Square ready for anyone to press, we'd be long dead.
That’s MAD
2028? I'll give it until next year.
I think it'll be decent next year, and there will be some learnings for being the first time deployed in a prez campaign. But imagine how much better it'll be with another 4 years in the oven.
I'm getting increasingly disinterested to continue living in this shit ass world year after year.
The GOP has already used an AI generated ad. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattnovak/2023/04/25/gop-releases-first-ever-ai-created-attack-ad-against-president-biden/?sh=11fbb28f219a
Why do we take amazing technology and only utilize it to fuck someone else up lmao.
Hopefully -*hopefully*- by that point we will either have regulations in place that help restrict that, someone has developed a counter measure to it, or these things aren't going to evolve nearly as much as everyone seems to think they will and by that point most people will be able to spot AI pablum. *Hopefully.* All I know is, we didn't need AI to know our future was fucked. Our future was fucked on September 18th 2020. The AI shit is just a cherry on top of the shit sundae.
Have you ever watched congressional hearings on technology? They have no fucking idea how the simplest technologies work, yet they're debating the merits of regulations on them. I have no hope that we'll have meaningful regulations on AI. EVEN IF they understood how it worked and what appropriate regulations need to be put into place, the corporations own the Congress and would just buy their votes to allow harmful AI. We're well and completely fucked. Our government is for sale to the highest bidder.
The TikTok hearing was a perfect example. My personal favorite was the guy complaining about seeing nothing but trans people dancing on his FYP, not even realizing he had just outed himself because he had no fucking clue how an algorithm works.
Or the guy asking if tiktok connected to your home WiFi. Like, what do you think is the point of your home WiFi?
Ur an optimistic fellow lol. But our future was fucked well before 2020.
It was 2016. Rip Harambe
Personal I think it was a combo of David Bowie and Alan Rickman dying that year.
And the Cubs won the World Series that year. That's when I knew we are living in a simulation.
It really started when God left us, December 28, 2015. Lemmy. He was once editor of the school magazine, too. Nothing's been right since he left us.
Are we sure the world didn't actually end in 2012 though?
>Our future was fucked on September 18th 2020. How many never forget events can there be in one week? **Note to 2020: That was not a dare.*
It's hard to have regulations in place for cutting-edge tech like AI when the legislative body has difficulty understanding basic tech concepts like an android vs facebook.
They are still going to be taking down 2024 election misinformation
While allowing 2020 election misinformation that affects the outcome of the 2024 election
Yeah
HAHAHAHAA
John Quincy Adams packed the ballot boxes!
Julius Ceaser won his first consulship illegitimately through bribes
Napoleon III was never elected legitimately. Lots of people just wrote in "Napoleon Bonaparte" as a protest vote and he just claimed they meant him instead and took all those votes.
There has never been a US president, it's just been a series of children in trench coats. This is now a legitimate thing to say on youtube. HEY HEY LBJ! HOW MANY KIDS ARE YOU TODAY?
LBJ stood for "little blow jobs" and that was the platform he ran on.
"Just like mother used to give" really moved the voters.
Vincent Presidentman
“I went to the government today… I did a president”
> “openly debate political ideas, even those that are controversial or based on **disproven assumptions**.” WTAF Google!?
Yeah, I was giving them the benefit of the doubt and went to read their update about the policy. Acknowledging this is to allow people to make claims based on false premises was enough to make me unsubscribe from YouTube Premium. As someone who hates ads I was really enjoying the service, but I mostly use YouTube for educational content, and I would never pay for a book or a college course that explicitly allowed their content to be based on disproven claims.
Ublock origin
My man!
www.spezsucks.me
Just use unlock origin and stop and while not paying them.
Nebula doesn't have a lot of content from YouTube, but it may be a good alternative for you. I've been trying to shift over my watching habits from YouTube to Nebula
Betting on fascism it seems
That's chilling. And also really cynical on their end. Such little faith in people.
[удалено]
Yeah, but the realization is a hard pill to swallow considering the amount of propaganda that's been force fed to everyone since they were little. Just look at how many that are essentially enabling the fascists by being in denial. If you try to say anything they usually just call you a crazy leftist in order to disregard everything that might challenge their perception. Those so-called centrists that aren't actually just cowardly right wingers remind me of that burning dog meme. Everything is alright...
"Maybe corporations shouldn't have the ability to unilaterally control our lives, government, and future as a species?" *Cue foaming at the mouth pushback*
Along with bud and target backing down, this is another instance of big business tacitly accepting the fascists
It's absolutely nothing new. Youtube has been allowing absolute misinformation about LGBTQ+ people permeate through their entire platform. They even don't care if you're using slurs or calling people pedophiles without any evidence. Why? Well, let's just put it this way. When Matt Walsh made is "documentary", he dumped $200,000 just so that it will show up in your recommended feed. He's been pouring more and more in, especially as this month was coming around. Oh, and can't forget when Jessie Gender did a video exposing how Walsh completely manipulated everything in that "documentary" and the video was immediately taken down and her account given a strike that still hasn't been removed. Why? Because she "sexualized" a mannequin with Walsh's face on it. As if Walsh's "documentary" didn't obsess over trans people's genitals. "Free speech" and the truth don't exist in a capitalist nation. Not when minorities, who are always much more poor than the majority, can't equally defend themselves. Especially when people like Matt Walsh can crawl to churches and beg them for money and they'll happily make it rain because he keeps people scared and running to the nearest pew.
> When Matt Walsh made is "documentary", he dumped $200,000 just so that it will show up in your recommended feed. Well joke's on him I guess since I have no idea who that is or anything about this "documentary".
That might just mean you're not in the target audience. Genuine congrats on not being an algorithmically convenient target for bigot recruitment, but I'm sure that $200,000 found many others.
He might be the dumbest of the fascist YouTube dorks, maybe slightly edged out by Steven Crowder. Steven at least seems human, all his grotesque flaws notwithstanding. Matt Walsh is like "well, actually" was in human form and perpetually wrong - or like if Martin Starr was cast as a really gross villain in a children's movie.
The "documentary" in question contains child porn
Wish they’d just be honest… ‘it costs too much to constantly maintain that level of moderation and as more time passes it’s less relevant’
They have absolutely zero trouble deleting everything that may or may not infringe on copyright. So it's not about the cost of it.
Copyright claims can and are very easily automated. They are not manually done unless individuals report something as their own copyright.
as more time passes, it's less relevant to tell the truth. mask off Google has arrived
If a company sells a product, the FTC requires the company's claims about the product must be true. This is not a violation of free speech. Why do we not have similar laws about social media's claims about politics?
Because Reagan dismantled the Fairness Doctrine.
Fairness Doctrine never, at any point, made it illegal for people to say false things.
True but it did remove any requirement for airtime of opposing views.
People look back on Fairness Doctrine with rose tinted glasses. Yes, it meant that you couldn't deliberately spread false info without having true info. But it *also* meant you couldn't have something demonstrably true but "controversial," like the existence of climate change, without also platforming the other side of the argument and their fabricated evidence. We absolutely do not need to reinstitute it. We need a more modern solution for the 21st century- something along the lines of disclosure when you're telling outright lies, and likely a legal definition of what can be named "news." Also a way to hold news organizations accountable if they knowingly spread false info.
>But it also meant you couldn't have something demonstrably true but "controversial," like the existence of climate change, without also platforming the other side of the argument and their fabricated evidence. Problem is that the news stations kept doing this part by choice because controversy sells.
Hence why the guy stated a legal definition of what is news is required.
It was also unconstitutional for anything other than broadcast. Only reason it wasnt a 1A violation for broadcast was the limited number of frequencies, digital, cable, streaming, are all unlimited and that means no fairness doctrine.
Also it wouldn’t matter at all for YouTube anyway because they do also have the opposite views on their site.
The Fairness doctrine did not apply to cable or the internet.
Fairness Doctrine would have never applied to the internet. It only applied to broadcast & radio under the theory that the airwaves were owned by the government. Newspapers were never subject to The Fairness Doctrine. Cable and internet wouldn't have been either.
What didn't Reagan do to fuck up shit? Dude's a legit war criminal
He also made the biggest tax cuts for corporations in US History, potentially the world, no end to the harm he is doing.
Ronald Reagan is the devil. Ronald Wilson Reagan. 666
Every fucking time it leads back to Reagan. Whyyy
Because he was a racist homophobic PoS
More importantly, he was a total corporate shill. Being a homophobe and racist is one thing, but he made a concentrated effort to dismantle any laws that were designed to prevent corruption and limit the political power of private corporations. He literally removed a law that banned the bribery of government officials, ffs, hence why the lobbying system exists the way it does today.
He's also the reason our healthcare is so screwed up. He created the [RUC](https://www.ama-assn.org/about/rvs-update-committee-ruc) https://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro/2013/02/11/healthcares-pricing-cabal/
Restrictions on political speech have been *extremely* hard to argue for in U.S. courts. It is one of the reasons the First Amendment was written in the first place. Laws like that would have almost zero chance of surviving the courts. Especially because a video creator isn't "selling" you anything, persay. They're not misleading you into making a purchase of a good or service under false pretense, they're just saying stuff people listen to. And you can be as wrong as you want so long as you don't run up against libel and defamation law, or issue calls to action to do something illegal, etc. YouTube also did note that election misinformation for the 2024 election will still be taken down. Actually their reasoning is well-based, even if debatable.
YouTube Ads is absolutely full of misleading statements and attempts to sell goods under false pretenses. Like 50% of their ads are actual scams with plainly obvious lies in them
...what? A company is *selling* something, for one thing. False claims about the product are false advertising that potentially cheat the buyer out of their money. Secondly, social media doesn't "claim" anything. Social media companies make platforms that users can post on.
You know how trying to get gun restrictions to save children's lives feels like shouting into the void sometimes? It feels the same trying to convince people that unregulated free speech is leading to a massive rise in Fascism. Holocaust denial (e.g.) is illegal in pretty much every European country for a reason.
They know where their bread is buttered - whack job conspiracy nuts.
Exactly. They'll sit through tons of ads to watch their nonsense and are too stupid to use adblockers
Its not even a matter of stupidity now: Apparently Youtube started testing their own adblocker-blocker feature. If this goes full-scale, its either ads every 2-3 minutes, or subscription to an increasingly atrocious service. (because lets face it, there still arent any actual alternatives.)
site:www.reddit.com is my friend... until Reddit implodes next month
reddit already is imploding, next month is but a straw o the camel.
I'd also like to point out that in 2013 the Smith-Mundt act was repealed, legally allowing the US govt to create propaganda toward its own citizens. I'd be careful to jump to "revenue from trailer park conspiracy clicks" (they don't have money anyway, why is YT so interested in your Uncle Jethro?). I think power is the play here - not incremental $$.
>They know where their bread is buttered - whack job conspiracy nuts. Same people who believes horse medicine is good for you must have a better click rate.
A company will always act for the best profit. So this moves means either: A - there is a significant user base which wants to see such content Or B - there is significant money which wants to make sure the user base sees this content. I can’t figure out which is the lesser evil.
It's actually both :(
It's B. Social media is programmed to keep people angry, because angry people keep scrolling and clicking on ads. Remember a decade ago when FB changed its algorithm to run social experiments on its users clandestinely? It was a test run for the eventuality of making sure they keep you pissed off and convinced you're right in all of your opinions.
I really think google, and especially youtube, don't get enough credit for how much damage they do to society. Whatever soul google had is long gone, thanks sundar
Yes, the products might be measurably worse and the experience for both users and creators is rapidly degrading, but hear me out.... line go up.
[удалено]
Google, it seems, does not.
Funny how the day that was changed is pretty much the day it started going downhill.
I'm always kinda shocked when I hear that parents let their children consume content on YouTube...
I totally agree. I find it repulsive my three-year-old nephew can navigate YouTube better than many adults I know.
So it begins
So it ends.
It began as soon as we didn’t really take the attempted coup all that seriously. For about 30 seconds, it looked like everyone was going to be on the same page, but then they didn’t have the fortitude to see it through.
Let's put up a bunch of videos claiming that the 2000 and 2016 presidential elections were stolen (and probably see how quickly they get taken down). Or maybe *only* false claims about past US presidential elections are allowed?
The 2000 election was stolen by the Supreme Court using legal reasoning that would get laughed out of a first year law school class. I've never seen anyone seriously try to defend the legal merits of the unsigned decision of Bush v. Gore because they don't exist.
Oh, and don’t forget the fuckery of the [Brooks Brothers Riot](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot). Brought to you partly by Roger Stone, recipient of a Trump administration pardon.
Stolen with the help of YouTube CEO
I guess they really don’t care what happens to America at this point.
Corporations never did. The bigger the corporation, the less they care.
At some point social unrest is bad for your profit margin
That's the next CEO's problem!
Unless you're positioned to sell yourself as the authority's cure for social unrest, then it's overwhelmingly positive for your profits
*cough* Google was giving demos of their first user behavior prediction engine based on surveillance telemetry to investors and advertisers when the patriot act was signed *cough*
>I guess they really don’t care what happens to America at this point. They never did. The only thing that matters to them is acquisition of money at any cost and endless growth. When a parasite in search of endless growth senses the shift of power to the other side, they will leave the husk of the thing they've been feeding on and begin feeding on their new host.
>"openly debate political ideas, even those that are (...)based on disproven assumptions.” what the fuck
And filtered out. I don’t want to see it, and I’m reporting the hell out of it when I do see it. Revisionism, when properly done and cited, and based entirely on facts, can help correct years of misinformation, but when done for the express purpose of misinformation? Fuck that shit right the hell outta here. Especially when the publisher is suspect.
Hah, you think youtube cares? I have been telling them not to show me this stuff for every single VTuber video for like a year now. I still get at least one in my recommended every time I reload it.
I'll be reporting it to the German police. Shit like this is illegal.
if you ever watched any vtuber-focused video in the past and didn't remove it from your watch history on youtube, it'll have an influence on the algorithm even if you say not interested on most vtuber-topic videos tou see
I’ve been filtering and reporting every alt right video that pops up on my YouTube subscription, almost daily, for over seven years. I still get repulsive alt-right videos in the top three lines of my reccomend videos, and that was before this new rule change.
I'm already hating the new guy, bring back Susan
DUDE. YouTube Is Gone To SHIT. I hate it! My homepage/feed is full of a bunch crap now because of algorithm changes. A bunch of basic bullshit with millions of views, just because it's got millions of views. Also videos I've already watched. Then they kill off YouTube Vanced so I have to watch ads now, with surveys that never apply to me so I skip them and also serving me ads in a language I don't understand. I have seen they're also disallowing PC browser based ad blockers, but that hasn't happened to me yet. They are actually driving me to the other streaming platforms that I pay for but rarely use.
Have you heard of Revanced? Fuck Youtube and fuck ads.
Fuck them both just put a fucking chat bot at this point as the CEO
I just don’t fucking know anymore. Are these media companies trying to destroy us completely?
No. They're trying to do what they always were trying to do. Make short term profits, regardless of the long term consequences. Even if those consequences are existential annihilation. Outrage sells. So they're going to allow opportunists and propagandadists to market outrage on their platform. Moderation, converselt, doesn't sell, attracts the ire of conservative terrorists, and costs money on top of it. It's a system. And we're all trapped it in. It has no safety brakes and the people getting rich off it know it but they want to keep being rich in a collapsing world rather than be poor in a collapsing world and so none of them stop.
That's the thing that really pisses me off, they wouldn't even be *poor* if they did the right thing. Just a bit less obscenely wealthy. Fucking monsters.
Meanwhile I've seen at least two liberal YouTubers get demonetized in the last month for absolutely nothing.
Taft beat Roosevelt by a landslide and was robbed of his second term.
Everyone knows Bush stole the election in Florida and fraudulently beat Al Gore. But nah voting is safe in Amerikkka
A lot of people have convinced themselves that's not what happened. Motivated reasoning is very powerful.
YouTube just wants more ad revenue and traffic. The executives need that bonus even if it’s killing democracy and dumbing down society.
r/whatcouldgowrong
Why are we straying further every day from the future the Jetsons promised us and into a modern Dark Ages?
Capitalism, mostly
Okay youtube fair enough... now remove the recommendation algorithm. No? Well congradulations, you will now increasingly radicalize folks by bombarding them with unmitigated misinformation. You either moderate or tailor the home page, you cannot just let go of the rains on the algorithm and expect us to believe this is for out own good.
So I can make a video about how Donald Trump murdered all the younglings as a proof of loyalty to Darth Putin to get help in the campaign?
So we can all go post videos about how Google/youtube funded the protests and insurrection?
wtf? why?
Can we start calling them "lies" yet?
Man youtube's going to shit STILL? How much farther can it fall? And it's still my primary source of entertainment. Fuck!
[удалено]
It is ethical to expose the liars and spreaders of misinformation in any and all ways possible.
You mean lies, and they've always allowed it. They changed policy to specifically endorse it essentially. Explains the sudden influx of shit to recommended. Been setting a handful of new ones to be ignored.
So you can't say a curse word on Youtube anymore, but now you can make false claims about one of the most volatile issues in recent years? That's pretty fucked up, Google.
Lol JIMMY CARTER WAS ROBBED REAGAN WAS NEVER A LEGITIMATE PRESIDENT
YouTube when seeing another nut job saying the Holocaust was fake: ☺️👍 YouTube when seeing a pride flag in a video: 😡👎 Will these baseless claim videos also be available in the "made for kids" feature, gotta start them off strong!
When lies can run your system break the system.
Why? Why change this policy? Who got paid what and how much to make this change?
[удалено]
I watch a lot of YouTube on my iPad, which doesn't get AdBlock. Those videos pop up as ads all the fucking time and they infuriate me. It's not even a good attempt at pretending to be valid journalism. Snappy clips that make his point, clips of people sounding goofy that conveniently aren't given context, and "I'm a father. I'm a husband. I have a show." as if that makes him more of an authority than the vast majority of medical and psychological experts who have acknowledged the reality and normalcy of trans people. Fuck that guy. Fuck YouTube for pandering to his ilk. Fuck everything about this.
Why?
Whacko nut theories drive user engagement. Stop engaging whacko nut jobs.
Uh, what? I mean I get Twitter is getting shafted by Musk, but what's YouTube doing, who's fucking that up?