How YouTube’s Shifting Algorithms Hurt Independent Media (The ‘Adpocalypse’)

It’s not just Youtube. It’s Facebook and other social media too. The effort to combat what has been called “fake news”  is being used as an excuse by the #oldmedia to protect their marketshare. 

Guess who doesn’t like independent media?

1. The old media companies that are being hammered.

2. The politicians who have cozy relationships with the old media.
3. The former “opinion makers” who have lost status in the wake of the Internet revolution.
4. Governments generally, but despotic ones in particular.
5. The political correctness authoritarians.
6. Big, crony corporations sick of having the “great unwashed” weigh in on their products.
7. Dianne Feinstein.

The #newmedia is vital to the country getting its act together. In an era of CNN and MSNBC propaganda this is especially true. Non-approved voices must be heard. That is a big part of what this country is all about. It used to be a big part of what Youtube was about.

Of course Google, and Facebook, and the others are private companies so they can do whatever they want. But people need to understand that some would like to jam the information genie back into the bottle. Right where governments, and their mouthpieces (the #oldmedia mostly) want to keep him.

(From The New York Times)

The topics of Mr. Pakman’s videos are no more controversial than the programming typically found on CNN or the local news. In fact, because his show is also broadcast over the radio, it adheres strictly to FCC content rules. But the show takes pride in its independence from corporate ownership. “I have no boss above me,” Mr. Pakman said, and because of YouTube’s automated ad systems, “I’ve never had any contact with advertisers, so it’s impossible for me to ‘sell out’ to satisfy them.”

Instead, he’s subject to the whims of the algorithm. To rein in its sprawling video empire — 400 hours of video are uploaded to the platform every minute — YouTube uses machine learning systems that can’t always discern context, or distinguish commentary or humor from hate speech. That limitation means that YouTube routinely pulls ads from content deemed “not advertiser-friendly.” That includes depictions of violence or drug use, “sexual humor” and “controversial or sensitive subjects,” including war and natural disasters. YouTube has previously blocked ads on Mr. Pakman’s news videos referring to ISIS church bombings and the assassination of a Russian diplomat. YouTube creators can appeal the decision to a human who will watch the video, but the recent changes have upended the usual processes, often leaving creators without an official channel for appeal…

…The internet was supposed to offer an opportunity for a diverse group of upstarts to challenge the corporate structure. But the same consolidation of power has happened online. Independent blogs have been shut down or snapped up by bigger companies. YouTube has long been owned by Google, which has gobbled up a greater share of online ad revenue in recent years. Google and Facebook are now so dominant that they form a practical duopoly over digital advertising.

And it must be noted that the media consolidation The Times makes reference to is as much a crony phenomena (that is about partnership with government regulators, etc.) as it is a corporate one. (After all why do you think most #oldmedia is basically “corporate Left”?)

Click here for the article.

http://www.againstcronycapitalism.org/