YouTube's New Moderators 'Mistakenly' Pull Right-Wing Channels

[NightHawkeye]

From the "And so the purge begins", files: YouTube's New Moderators Mistakenly Pull Right-Wing Channels

YouTube’s new moderators, brought in to spot fake, misleading and extreme videos, stumbled in one of their first major tests, mistakenly removing some clips and channels in the midst of a nationwide debate on gun control.

The Google division said in December it would assign more than 10,000 people to moderate content after a year of scandals over fake and inappropriate content on the world’s largest video site.

In the wake of the Feb. 14 school shooting in Parkland, Florida, some YouTube moderators mistakenly removed several videos and some channels from right-wing, pro-gun video producers and outlets. On Tuesday, some YouTube channels began complaining about their accounts being pulled entirely. That would have marked a sweeping policy change for YouTube, which typically only removes channels in extreme circumstances and focuses most disciplinary action on specific videos. But YouTube said it was a mistake.​

Reminds me of disciplining a three-year old. It was "on accident".

 

[Kentonio]

The fact they put them back again shows it was an accident. If they wanted to get rid of them, they'd just wipe them out en masse and theres not a thing anyone could so about it other than whine.

 

[NightHawkeye]

The fact they put them back again shows it was an accident. If they wanted to get rid of them, they'd just wipe them out en masse and theres not a thing anyone could so about it other than whine.

They're simply testing the limits at the moment. They will continue to test them.

 

[Rion]

The fact they put them back again shows it was an accident. If they wanted to get rid of them, they'd just wipe them out en masse and theres not a thing anyone could so about it other than whine.

They had a similar accident with Jordan Peterson before.

 

[Albion]

The fact they put them back again shows it was an accident. .

Let's first see how many more times these "accidents" occur with Conservative articles and videos at the hands of supposedly trained personnel.

 

[Kentonio]

They had a similar accident with Jordan Peterson before.

Perhaps if these guys weren’t so easily mistaken for extremists, his wouldn’t keep happening?

 

[SilverBear]

Giving credit where credit s due. between 100, 000 and 250,000 new video are uploaded to youtube every day. Youtube monitors that much material for individual rules violations constantly. Only a fool could think that mistakes would not be made in that process.

Youtube's integrity is not shown by mistakes made but by how mistakes are handled.

 

[Rion]

Perhaps if these guys weren’t so easily mistaken for extremists, his wouldn’t keep happening?

If you think Jordan Peterson is an extremist, you might be Cathy Newman.

 

[TLK Valentine]

From the "And so the purge begins", files: YouTube's New Moderators Mistakenly Pull Right-Wing Channels

YouTube’s new moderators, brought in to spot fake, misleading and extreme videos, stumbled in one of their first major tests, mistakenly removing some clips and channels in the midst of a nationwide debate on gun control.

The Google division said in December it would assign more than 10,000 people to moderate content after a year of scandals over fake and inappropriate content on the world’s largest video site.

In the wake of the Feb. 14 school shooting in Parkland, Florida, some YouTube moderators mistakenly removed several videos and some channels from right-wing, pro-gun video producers and outlets. On Tuesday, some YouTube channels began complaining about their accounts being pulled entirely. That would have marked a sweeping policy change for YouTube, which typically only removes channels in extreme circumstances and focuses most disciplinary action on specific videos. But YouTube said it was a mistake.​

Reminds me of disciplining a three-year old. It was "on accident".

Suppose it wasn't "on accident" -- so what? It's not like we have net neutrality or anything...

 

[Nithavela]

They're a private company. Shouldn't they be allowed on which people they allow to use their site as a platform?

I thought this was free market capitalism?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

They're a private company. Shouldn't they be allowed on which people they allow to use their site as a platform?

I thought this was free market capitalism?

If Fox News can disallow all truth and reality, I don’t see why YouTube can’t disallow right wing videos...

 

[Ironhold]

They're a private company. Shouldn't they be allowed on which people they allow to use their site as a platform?

I thought this was free market capitalism?

Actually, they're being sued by pundit Dennis Prager over just that.

Prager maintains the "Prager University" channel on YouTube, which is all about Prager and various pundits holding classroom-style lectures on various talking points. The videos are created assuming a "general" audience, meaning "all ages and all demographics". But despite this, virtually every single video is flagged by YouTube in such a fashion that they don't appear in "restricted" mode, which is the default setting that many schools and other institutions have YouTube set to. This means that a large swath of potential audiences - including minors - can't see the videos unless they have some means of watching the channel outside of restricted mode.

Prager U is one of *many* libertarian and conservative channels whose videos are being automatically shunted off into "restricted" mode regardless of their content not generally being "mature" enough to merit it, whereas liberal and progressive channels like The Young Turks aren't getting tagged at all despite frequent swearing and a penchant for going into unorthodox or bizarre topics.

Prager & co. are arguing that YouTube has held itself out as a free speech platform and a wide open public forum for anyone and everyone to say their peace, and so their inconsistent handling when it comes to censoring videos and channels basically represents them lying to the public - and their users - about what is and isn't actually allowed. And since YouTube allows people to monetize their videos and receive a percentage of the ad revenue, this inconsistent censorship is also depriving creators of money they would otherwise have earned had their videos not been falsely flagged or hidden.

There's a channel called YouTuber Law which is hosted by an actual lawyer who specializes in tech issues. He's been covering the lawsuit (along with other legal issues) since the day the suit was revealed to the public.

 

[Nithavela]

PragerU, eh?

Good riddance.

 

[super animator]

Tone of voice do not travel in the internet.

 

[MoonlessNight]

Moderation positions like these are going to appeal primarily to people who want to abuse their power to get rid of channels that they don't like. I can't imagine that the moderators are paid that well, especially if there are really 10,000 of them as the article says, and slogging through video after video must be especially tedious. There's not much reason to apply, other than being able to attack channels that you don't like.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Moderation positions like these are going to appeal primarily to people who want to abuse their power to get rid of channels that they don't like. I can't imagine that the moderators are paid that well, especially if there are really 10,000 of them as the article says, and slogging through video after video must be especially tedious. There's not much reason to apply, other than being able to attack channels that you don't like.

We already know that Google's bias is to the left ... and overtly righteous as well. That was clearly evident when they fired James Damore.

One is reminded that eliminating 'FAKE' news is a tactic which is always employed by leftist nations. The USSR even went so far as to name its premiere news organization "TRUTH" (Pravda, пра̑вда).

It's too bad Google dropped its motto of "Do no evil".

 

[Rion]

YouTube Hiring for Some Positions Excluded White and Asian Males, Law…

YouTube Hiring for Some Positions Excluded White and Asian Males, Lawsuit Says

The lawsuit, filed by Arne Wilberg, a white male who worked at Google for nine years, including four years as a recruiter at YouTube, alleges the division of Alphabet Inc.’s Google set quotas for hiring minorities. Last spring, YouTube recruiters were allegedly instructed to cancel interviews with applicants who weren’t female, black or Hispanic, and to “purge entirely” the applications of people who didn’t fit those categories, the lawsuit claims.

Sounds like a completely reasonable, and totally non-partisan group of people, really.

 

[Bio-Luminescent Billy]

The fact they put them back again shows it was an accident. If they wanted to get rid of them, they'd just wipe them out en masse and theres not a thing anyone could so about it other than whine.

Some of them are still wiped.

Perhaps if these guys weren’t so easily mistaken for extremists, his wouldn’t keep happening?

Anyone who confuses Peterson for an extremist, is themselves the extremist divorced from reality.

Giving credit where credit s due. between 100, 000 and 250,000 new video are uploaded to youtube every day. Youtube monitors that much material for individual rules violations constantly. Only a fool could think that mistakes would not be made in that process.

YouTube's integrity is not shown by mistakes made but by how mistakes are handled.

The only thing consistent in YouTube behavior is how they routinely mishandle mistakes.

Suppose it wasn't "on accident" -- so what? It's not like we have net neutrality or anything...

NN regulated bandwidth throttling and fast-lanes. It did absolutely nothing to protect censorship of content.

They're a private company. Shouldn't they be allowed on which people they allow to use their site as a platform?

I thought this was free market capitalism?

Government abetted monopolies are a side effect of predatory capitalism, or corporatism, which is what we have now. It's been a while since we've had anything really resembling "Free" markets.

PragerU, eh?

Good riddance.

"I disagree with what you have to say, so I'm going to sit on my butt while they shut you up."

Huh, I remember that quote being different. Must be that Mandela Effect.

If Fox News can disallow all truth and reality, I don’t see why YouTube can’t disallow right wing videos...

You know, for a group who love to hate Fox, you sure do let them govern a disturbingly high amount of your arguments.

 

[SilverBear]

The only thing consistent in YouTube behavior is how they routinely mishandle mistakes.

how was this incident mishandled?

 

[essentialsaltes]

Actually, they're being sued by pundit Dennis Prager over just that.

There's a channel called YouTuber Law which is hosted by an actual lawyer who specializes in tech issues. He's been covering the lawsuit (along with other legal issues) since the day the suit was revealed to the public.

Non YouTube judge dismissed the case.

To the surprise of no one (other than Dennis Prager?) the court found that "YouTube is not a "state actor" bound by the First Amendment"