YouTube relaxes moderation rules to allow more controversial content

11 comments

1. So no more gen Z/alpha orwellian doublespeak on YT? Thank God…

2. Good, now bring up the dislike button feature back, I really miss it, and yes, I know about the dislike viewer plugins, but they aren’t usually accurate.

3. Have advertisers finally learned that most people are functioning rational adults and understand that if a spokesperson says “fuck” outside of the sponsored segment virtually no one cares and it doesn’t really impact my opinion of their product/service/company at all?

   Or is this just a way for more grifters to make money on tragedies 💀

4. When it comes to business news you’ve to always read between the lines. Businesses are not moral driven but profit driven, most of them or all of them in the big leagues. You’ve two types of moderation:
   1. Blind approach, anything may trigger automated moderation and very often it hits outside the intended target. This approach requires a sizeable human department for appeals (even though even appeals are automated nowadays).
   2. Accurate approach, which requires a sizeable human department but results in less appeals.

   Either case the company employees too many people for their liking, I won’t be surprised if we will see another round of firing from Google soon.

   TL;DR YouTube has still so many unresolved problems so it’s not an “improvement of service”, just cutting costs.

5. Looking at the article, this is not good. If a video that by just the title is misinformation but allowed since “public interest outweighs the risk,” YouTube is helping spread the misinformation without users being able to report as such.

6. I watch tons of informational/documentary based content on YouTube and the changes will have a huge effect on the content creators feel like they can create and post about. Traditionally anything that even ran up against the line would be seen as a major risk to do because if you post it’ll be de-monetized, and your channel and videos can literally be hidden by the algorithm.

   I hope this is overall beneficial for the platform.

7. # Let’s play a game!

   Without reading the article or the comments here, these are my assumptions:

   * **youtube is not** relaxing it’s policies on sexual content
   * **youtube is not** relaxing it’s policies on using licensed content
   * **youtube is not** relaxing it’s policies to lower the amount of random strikes handed out for free and open-source software that may be in competition with youtube
   * **youtube is not** relaxing it’s policies on unaffiliated journalism

   * **youtube is** lowering it’s policies on insulting people – primarily women, lgbtqa+ people, migrants, etc.

8. The idea that Rfk jr anti Vax content is considered “public interest” and that apparently outweighs the issue of spreading medical misinformation, is a damning indictment of our society and the corporations that control so much of it.

9. Pity YT won’t let us have ‘freedom of expression’ in the damn comments! Their dumb comment censorship bot deletes the most inane things, comments that would never bother any human reviewer. It’s so tiresome having to reload the page a minute later to check if your comment passed their ridiculously opaque algorithm. Often you can get past it just by re-arranging the comment or breaking it up into several comments, which just goes to show how utterly dumb whatever ‘AI’ they’re using as a censor is.

10. Let me guess!

    Alt-right content, conspiracies, Joe Rogan will be back more than ever.

    “Fuck” will still be banned and passionate videos demonetized.

    Am I right?

11. Controversial content will mean fascist propaganda, hate speech, and medical misinformation. Creators will still be demonetized for saying fuck or displaying a nipple.

Comments are closed.