You have to understand what we’re dealing with here, an extreme tyrant by the name of Susan Wojcicki.
Who is she?
Her sister is Anne and Anne is married to Google co-founder, Sergey Brin. Susan is also worth ~$400 million — and she’s very smart, and she’s been the CEO of Youtube since 2014. However, after the elections, the free speech mood over at YT changed and Susan promised to do something about it. She promised to crack down on fake news and also demonetize hate speech. Because the platform is so big, she deployed machine learning idiot robots to do this. The subsequent result was the complete destruction of the Youtube community. People who’ve made their lives on YT, professional vloggers, went from making hundreds of thousands to almost nothing at all. The iBankCoin channel, which is now suspended for posting “hate speech” in the form of a CNN interview, went from netting monthly revenues of $4,000 to a few hundred bucks. Lucky for me, I don’t need that money.
This is what Youtube suspended our account over.
Youtube hit iBankCoin with second strike for publishing main stream content which they said violated community guidelines. What in the actual fuck!? One more strike and they delete the channel. pic.twitter.com/7VOW7w8SfH
— The_Real_Fly (@The_Real_Fly) March 9, 2018
So off Susan went, furthering and deepening her crusade against what she deemed to be hateful speech. She has since expanded that mantra to include ‘conspiracy’ videos. I imagine ‘fake lunar landing’, 9/11 was an inside job, the illuminati runs the world’, and everything you needed to know about ‘aliens’ videos will soon be deleted from Susan’s website.
Why?
Because she said so.
You’re a dumb goat and cannot make good decisions, so she’ll make them for you. Don’t worry, it’s a private company and they can do whatever they want, just like the electricity company is private and can shut off your lights if they felt like it. Quit being anti-capitalist.
In the event she doesn’t remove your video, she might just myth bust it with links posted to your video, against your will. And, there’s nothing you can do about it.
Conspiracy videos abound on YouTube, whether it’s about the Earth being flat or school shootings being staged. YouTube, its parent Google, Facebook and Twitter are all facing challenges with the spread of misinformation, propaganda and fake news.
YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki said at a conference Tuesday that the company will include links to the online encyclopedia Wikipedia to try to debunk videos espousing conspiracy theories.
But Wikipedia itself has had its share of credibility issues, as the service lets anyone edit its content, whether that person is a pedigreed expert or an online troll. Though Wikipedia has tried to address that — in part by restricting edits on high-profile or controversial pages — it isn’t immune from hoaxes and its own conspiracy theories.
In a statement Wednesday, YouTube said the links will include other “third-party sources” besides Wikipedia, though YouTube isn’t identifying any. The organization that runs Wikipedia said Wednesday that it had no formal partnership with YouTube, but welcomed the use of Wikipedia resources.
YouTube said the move is part of a broader initiative to crack down on misinformation, though it did not give details on what else is in the works.
While conspiracy videos are nothing new on YouTube, the topic received renewed attention in recent weeks as videos falsely claimed that students speaking out about the Feb. 14 Florida school shooting, which killed 17 people, were “crisis actors” who were not really there when it happened. One such conspiracy video was the top trending video on YouTube until the company removed it — although many similar videos remained up, illustrating the difficulty in instituting any sort of crackdown.
Conspiracy videos, to be sure, are not against YouTube’s policies. In the “crisis actor” case, the company said it removed the video because it violated its rules against harassment. As such, YouTube is unlikely to ban misinformation entirely. Instead, it may adopt Facebook’s tactic of de-emphasizing such content and making it less likely to be seen. As it stands, critics say YouTube is doing the opposite.
How is Susan able to accomplish this gigantic task? It’s simple. During supper she asked her brother in-law, Sergey, if she could hire 10,000 people to ‘clean up’ Youtube and he thought about it, whilst rapidly swishing some Bordeaux in his wine glass, and then he said yes.
She then asked if she could employ the ultra-left leaning Southern Poverty Law Center to help clean it up and again he gave it some thought, and then his wife Anne touched his hand and looked at him and said ‘please sweet heart, do it for me’ and again he said yes.
The net result has been scorched earth ever since, with thousands of right of center content providers being ‘accidentally’ purged.
The one silver lining in all this is the likelihood that we’ll never have to see a flat earth video again, no matter how interested it might be.
If you enjoy the content at iBankCoin, please follow us on Twitter
Let’s spell “Anti Trust”…or “Class Action Lawsuit” all together now kids.
Banned!
Regards
Chuck Bennett
The right wingnuts gained control of the White House, Congress, Supreme Court by bought and paid for dissemination of lies and slander, so shut up and stop crying.
Banned by Youtube? Private company or not? Suppression of subversive material called free speech? That’s because truth is insulting in communities run by jewish bolsheviks such as Sergey Mikhaylovich Brin born in Moscow in the Soviet Union to Russian Jewish parents. Susan Diane Wojcicki is of Russian-Jewish descent and so on…goes to show how the mentality of jewish bolsheviks works. Bannings is step one. Step two? Cheka will be dispatched to your home, you will be hauled away to Lubyanka prison, the same prison where Alexander Solzhenitsyn had the privilege to interact with jews and form a clear opinion of them and said, “For a Jew nothing is more insulting than the truth”. It’s a badge of honor to be banned by marxist platforms and it is your confirmation that you are speaking truth and you are right and correct; otherwise there would be no need to ban anyone for talking laughable shit. It’s the truth that insults Jews more than anything else.
https://tinyurl.com/yd53u73a
Isn’t there a thing called “The Donald” on Reddit? Go there.
And once that is gone… isn’t there a thing called 4chan? Go there.
And once that is gone… isn’t there a thing called meeting each other in person to discuss stuff? Go there.
And once that is considered conspiracy… isn’t there a thing called just thinking inside you’re own head? Just do that.
You don’t get it. Liberals get the Bulleit too.
>netting monthly revenues of $4,000 to a few hundred bucks.
Wow! I never realized a You Tube revenue stream could be that rewarding. I’m sure some folks do need their You Tube money. Folks have told me to switch to Duck-Duck-Go or other search to keep money from Google…may finally be time.
Apparently AJ and his Infowars earned around $100K a month. I learned that recently on this site; Maven I think. And I have not used Joogle in at least 7years as my search engine. Even Startpage is fucked up. Only Duck-Duck-Go here – always unfiltered results.
The channel gets a lot of views, 25 million over past year and change.
I was referring to iBC’s not Infowars.
Duck Duck go is funded by, wait for it…
FRED WILSON
Never heard of F. Wilson. What is the significance? Wilson said at TechCrunch Disrupt conference in New York. “We invested in it because there is a need for a private search engine. We did it for the Internet anarchists, people that hang out on Reddit and Hacker News.”
https://tinyurl.com/ydguarwn
The right brought this on themselves.
They started with outright lies, led by Trump himself, such as “Obama is a foreign-born Muslim.” These are the worst kind of lies, that purposely sow hatred and dissension. Then there was the whole redefintion of “fake news,” from something that was factually incorrect to news that Trump didn’t like.
You are part of the problem, Fly. While you have certainly toned down the rhetoric, a year ago was a different story. While I don’t think you are a racist, you certainly made them comfortable here. You reap what you sow.
Personally, I think that *although perfectly legal*, it does weaken freedom of speech because YouTube and other privately-owned social media sites are even more popular than traditional news outlets. Of course, the real problem is that the way most people judge the accuracy of news stories is on whether the news story fits in with their ideology.
Orwell’s 1984 – was that a marxist or “right wing” world?
So I am part of the problem?
For fuck’s sake.
Whatever.
Think about this: we don’t know from where these rumors came. Some allege that the Obama birth certificate thing came from Hillary. But it could have come from anywhere.
More important is who controls the narrative, not who started the rumor. To control the narrative is to control the rumor so one can claim ownership of the ‘so-called’ truth, even though it might be a pack of lies. You and I would never have a chance to know one from the other.
So this is where GoogleYouTubeFacebookTwitter are heading: domination of the narrative.
Good point, Cricket, but this is why net nutrality is even more important thatn GYTFY.
Currently, at least we have the option of looking at alt-right (or alt-left) websites to find alternative narratives (whcih we can than judge on its own merits), and there is nothing the GYTFY can do to stop that.
Without net neutrality, ISPs become gate keepers to all of the internet, and these alt websites can be priced out of existence.
What is the end game for YouTube? Why are they alienating users and reducing revenue? If you don’t like a video no one forces you to search and view them. I don’t like child molesting videos so I am not going to search them out. I don’t get what the issue is unless its illegal like CP?
The end game is already here. The social media is replacing the traditional print/tee vee/radio media as the primary propaganda tools of the visible State as well as the deep state.
Gap
Removing news and information from the public record is never a good idea, no matter how much you dislike it.
This is the same as a book burning, only digital.
C’mon, Fly. You are better than this.
This isn’t .gov digitally burning books. This is a private entity doing so (per your argument). I’m allow to burn whatever books I want. It becomes an issue when .gov starts burning them. Nice attempt at the strawman, though.
(And no, I am not going down the rabbit hole that is coming in response, where sarc or one of the other wackos here starts telling me that google/youtube/twitter/FB are all run by the deep state).
I cannot disagree more. There is no competition. They cannot do as they like, since they have a monopoly. Not only is it unethical, it is also against the law.
They should hang for it.
Last I checked, this was a capitalist country, and private entities could do whatever the fuck they wanted as long as they don’t break a law.
You don’t like youtube’s policies? Start your own nutjob video hosting site and bank coin.
Same with Twitter.
Jesus, you guys bitch about liberals being snowflakes….
Obviously you must be very old because the last time you checked and murika was a capitalist country had to be prior to 1913, before the establishment of the FED. Since then it’s been a marxist centrally planned shithole.
Your point has an element of truth, but is also a copout. The wildly inconsistent and hypocritical ways those sights selectively enforce their “standards” are ridiculous.
It’s common for conservatives to defend 1st amendment rights of those on the left, but it’s rarely reciprocated.
That’s a bullishit argument, because these socials are ghettos and they are monopolies. Youtube is able to do this only because they belong to Google.
Break them up.
They have a public responsibility to be fair, because of their monopoly.
LOLZ. Regulation is bad until its good.
Look, I click through your little links on the right knowing exactly each site’s spin on things. I don’t think any media has a responsibility to be “fair.” I, as an intelligent human, have a responsibility to know what I’m clicking, reading or watching.
Your argument is valid if we are going to treat social like utilities. That’s an argument for a different day.
My argument is not bullshit. You are just butthurt for some reason.
You don’t have to regulate them, you just have to break them up. Split Youtube from Google and then let’s see how much they censor.
So it would be ok for an individual to buy a drug company and raise prices by 5000%? Because capitalism and I can do whatever I want because it’s my company. Riiiigght.
Guessing the time you spent trying to recall lies of the left can be measured in nano-seconds.
Like the poor martyr Mike Brown, a defensive-tackle sized felon, had his hands up when he was murdered in cold blood by just one of the legion of racist, lawless cops.
No, the right didn’t bring this on themselves. They are merely easy targets of the dishonest SJW left.
I would prefer less censorship, even if it is the private and legal kind.
However, that would only work out if people were more honest and called out the bullshit on their own tribe. Instead, the grey areas are being replaced by simplistic B&W:
– Every unarmed black man killed by police is a crime to BLM, while every police killing of an unarmed black man is justifiable according to Blue Shield Warriors.
– Every illegal immigrant is either an MS-13 gang member or a tax-paying worker in a below-minimum wage job that no one else wants.
– Tax cuts on the rich are either always good for the economy or never good.
Or how about kneeling:
1) When being knighted by royalty: deferential
2) When proposing to a girl friend: romantic
3) While praying in a church: pious
4) During the national anthem to bring attention to police brutality: disrespectful
No double standard there at all.
Or what about Roy Motherfucking Moore? Just how low does the moral bar go for “conservateive” Christiians? Less hyprocrisy, and a little consistency go a long way.
And Yes, Fly, you ARE part of the problem. You have a financial blog, but go ahead and take a look at what your currently most popular post is: some elderly women almost falling down some stairs 3 days ago. Is that your idea of apolitical finacial news? Is it any different than Rachel Maddow showing a clip of Donald Trump with his “hair” almost flying off his head?
Sorry to burst your bubble. The label you are looking for is “stereotyping”. Stereotyping is good. Very good. Stereotyping allows us to make generalizations about information and situations so that we don’t have to re-analyze them when we experience them over and over again. Stereotyping is not some kind of pathology that we are susceptible to unless we are very careful to overcome it. Those who failed to stereotype, were much more likely to go extinct,
https://tinyurl.com/z76ge7y
While some people think that stereotypes are bad, I’m not one of them. I generally agree that stereotypes are useful – for making initial evaluations.
However, only an idiot or a fool would judge people and situations *exclusively* based on sterotypes without looking at the facts at hand and updating their evaluation. This seems pretty obvious.
When facts change I change my stereotyping bias. What do you do, sir?
Why did you reply to my original post then?
My whole point was that you shouldn’t make final judgements without looking at all the availble facts.
For example, if a cop kills an unarmed minority, I have no issues with someone assuming that it was justified or not justified when they first hear about it. However, they shoudl be ready to change their minds with more information.
Another example: not all Jews are bad.
I’d like to give you tons more +1 for the last line. You’re right, there might be one or two Jews that are pretty good.
See? My stereotypes of white-supremist is that most are of below-average intelligence and aren’t worth my time engaging, but I obviously adjusted my personal view of you or I would have ignored you long ago.
Of course, the next step is to adjust your behavior based on your new found knowledge.
TL;DR
This is a pathetic move. I agree with you Fly.
As far as ad revenue though, how is IBC allowed to make a single dollar on YouTube? All I see is reposting of clips that you don’t own and didn’t create.
I knew it would only take a while for these froot loops to kill their own product which essentially just steals other peoples stuff. I really think Google sucks. Eric Schmidt is widely known as an apple director who ripped apple off. I think people are going to leave googles only decent product in droves. Conspiracy theory: Google is some type of puppet. Keep the siliclown valley weirdness posts going. these fruitcakes never cease to amaze me.