by Ian Miles Cheong
chairman is Eric Schmidt, also a member of the
and a died-in-the-wool Technocrat who is bent on
imposing his ideology on the entire world.
platform has become his sledge hammer. Expect
censorship to increase along with howls of
protest from users.
YouTubers React to Censorship of 'Controversial' Content
YouTube has announced a new system to catch and flag what it calls,
"controversial religious and supremacist" videos hosted on the
The platform plans to
hide these videos from wider audiences, and demonetize them to
prevent their creators from earning revenue from YouTube.
The move was met with widespread skepticism from YouTube content
To crack down on offensive content, the company is using a
combination of machine learning and volunteer "experts" to flag that
needs review. It also plans to implement "tougher standards" for
videos that are controversial but do not violate the site's terms of
YouTube says it isn't going to remove the borderline content
entirely, but will instead place these videos in a purgatory state
preventing them from being monetized or promoted.
To facilitate these
changes, YouTube will be artificially altering its search algorithms
to prevent offensive topics from discovery.
We'll soon be applying tougher treatment to videos that aren't
illegal but have been flagged by users as potential violations of
our policies on hate speech and violent extremism. If we find that
these videos don't violate our policies but contain controversial
religious or supremacist content, they will be placed in a limited
The videos will remain on
YouTube behind an interstitial, won't be recommended, won't be
monetized, and won't have key features including comments, suggested
videos, and likes.
According to YouTube, the system, while largely automated, will mix
in human reviews in the form of its already established "Trusted
Flagger" volunteer program that works with over 15 institutions to
deal with extremist content, including the Anti-Defamation League
The ADL recently
released a list naming members of the "alt-right" and the "alt-lite,"
the latter of which included controversial YouTube personalities
the ADL is selective in what it
chooses to label as "extremism."
It does not
have violent far-left ideologies like Antifa and militant
leftist organizations like
Redneck Revolt on its radar.
It's worth noting
that the "Trusted Flagger" system was later transformed into the
much maligned "YouTube
Heroes" program, which invited the public to help moderate
It was heavily
criticized for giving social justice activists the power to
manipulate the platform.
A picture illustration shows a YouTube logo
reflected in a person's eye June 18, 2014.
REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/File Photo
apparent focus on targeting extremism, YouTube's announcement
includes the company's efforts to artificially promote videos
through its "Creators
for Change" program, which in YouTube's own words pushes
creators who are,
voices to speak out against hate speech, xenophobia, and
Ramsey, are listed as ambassadors and fellows.
Notably absent is
Laci Green, whose strong 1.5 million subscriber count earns
her top billing as the site's most popular feminist.
come under fire from social justice advocates for opening
dialogue with anti-feminists.
"If a video
doesn't break YouTube's terms of services then they absolutely
SHOULD NOT be attempting to dampen the reach of the video any
further," said YouTuber Annand "Bunty
King" Virk, who raised his concerns with The Daily Caller.
what's passable and what isn't? At what point do we finally
realize that saying the right thing isn't always about saying
what people want to hear?"
standards, if YouTube existed previous to the Emancipation Act,
they'd be censoring videos criticizing slave owners, since being
anti-slavery wasn't popular… at all," he added.
opinion isn't always the right opinion."
who goes by
MundaneMatt on YouTube, shared his views with
The Daily Caller
on the move.
know its almost a non-issue completely," Jarbo said. "But due to
the controversies surrounding those videos, they've gotten a
much larger spotlight than they deserve."
"I do not trust
their ability [to automatically flag extremist content]," he
"I think they
have an algorithm in place to help combat those issues, but it's
not narrow enough to not impact the skeptical/anti-SJW content."
Jeff Holiday told The Daily Caller that he doesn't worry
about the policy affecting his revenue, as he's already diversified
his income with other platforms, but worries that the crackdown will
affect other creators.
"The move to
counter extremist content is of course a good one in theory,"
language used in their announcement does not fill me with
confidence it will be restricted to legitimate extremism. I
remain optimistic but wary."
"YouTube has a
clear bias given who they choose to promote for free on their
site such as Francesca Ramsey who perpetually produces vastly
disliked videos," he remarked.
"That isn't to
say there is a case for them censoring controversial content.
I've had a few videos marked advertiser unfriendly, but it
hasn't been something perpetual.
they might crack down further does concern me greatly. Again,
not for the income, but for the potential disincentives it may
cause future creators of controversial politics."
"I do think
there are valid concerns in Google possibly funding legitimate
extremist enterprises, but the fact is that people like to abuse
systems, especially automated ones," said YouTuber Chris
Maldonado, who's also known as
Chris Ray Gun.
only a matter of time before this backfires in some ridiculous
The curator of
Undoomed, a channel that regularly makes light of social justice
warriors, shared his concerns about YouTube's new direction.
"No one can
really say who's going to be impacted by this new road map, and
that's the point isn't it? If their policies and terms of
service aren't there to help guide creators anymore, then why
even have them?
anyone could be at risk without even knowing it," he said.
"I have no
problem with YouTube cracking down on terrorist recruitment
videos and the likes," clarified Undoomed. "What I don't
understand is how such videos could've possibly been considered
acceptable under the extant TOS and policies."
"I think there
is a high probably for collateral damage with this new
attitude," he said.
could conceivably consider skeptics and anti-SJWs 'extremists,'
while all we are doing is arguing for a little common sense, and
of course for freedom of speech as demanded by the
is that 'trusted flaggers' is just a code word for the 'usual
suspects'. i.e. the same type of radical left-wing reactionaries
that have reshaped Twitter into an Orwellian nightmare," he