[HN Gopher] YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression'...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom Expression' Award
       Sponsored by YouTube
        
       Author : arprocter
       Score  : 253 points
       Date   : 2021-04-20 19:55 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.newsweek.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.newsweek.com)
        
       | belval wrote:
       | This reads like an headline from "The Onion".
        
         | pjbk wrote:
         | Crazy. Now that you say that, I honestly thought it was a
         | parody even showing up here in HN. Took me a few seconds to
         | realize it was not when reading the article, and had to watch
         | part of the video to convince myself. But then again, most news
         | these days read like an Onion article of yesteryears. Just sad,
         | not funny anymore.
        
         | thefounder wrote:
         | Not long time ago all the daily news headlines looked like from
         | "The Onion".
        
         | jkingsbery wrote:
         | There was also an episode of The Office (US) about this. Dwight
         | suggests to Jim he starts an employee-of-the-month award, then
         | rigs it so Jim wins so that everyone turns on Jim. Jim at least
         | had the good sense to decline the award.
        
           | munk-a wrote:
           | We can't really tell what is going on behind the curtain but
           | my optimistic view is that no one in the room realized that
           | receiving this award would have some terrible optics and that
           | the awarders chose YouTube genuinely - if you have a narrow
           | view of the content on there (and nobody sees everything)
           | there are some segments where youtube does try to reinforce
           | free speech sorta... maybe I'm being too charitable though.
           | 
           | My cynical hope though is that Youtube pressured the award
           | committee to give them one for hosting it - please someone in
           | Youtube leak a memo about putting pressure on the committee
           | it would be so absolutely delicious.
        
         | gscott wrote:
         | Which YouTube would turn around and censor
        
       | rubyist5eva wrote:
       | This is a joke, right?
        
       | whereis wrote:
       | Youtube's algo gaslighted me about the suicide of a childhood
       | friend, by picking content that mocked his life after I learned
       | the bad news.
       | 
       | I had already curated my feed to two specific science topics, and
       | the top rec was a blaring million IQ evil AI punching me in the
       | gut with an Iron Fist. I've never been the same since. Florence
       | Nightingale effect.
       | 
       | People such as Wojcicki have poor moral compasses, or they aren't
       | accountable.
        
         | all2 wrote:
         | I want to hear more about this.
        
       | calltrak wrote:
       | The "book burners" of Youtube have deplatformed 10's of thousands
       | of content creators if said content goes against the real owners
       | agenda and in most cases just the truth thats not the official
       | conspiracy theory.
       | 
       | If you put up a comment they don't like they delete it..
       | 
       | Freedom of speech award for this youtube. Now thats a joke!
       | Speaking of jokes here is a joke.
       | 
       | https://picc.io/p/tq2sFHU.png
        
       | spaetzleesser wrote:
       | They are learning from the entertainment industry. Industry
       | insiders giving each other awards like the Grammy and Oscar.
        
       | bilekas wrote:
       | Could this be related to the Dunning-Kruger Effect ?
       | 
       | Seems incredible naive and maybe oblivious to the actions that
       | are being taken by YouTube (correctly or not)..
        
       | geniium wrote:
       | Is this some kind of joke? :/
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | qzw wrote:
       | Aren't most industry awards really bought and paid for? Like the
       | stuff they give out at conferences and from trade magazines.
        
         | ardit33 wrote:
         | Yeah, but it is not so brazen, as there are more levels of
         | indirection. This is way out of touch form the people involved
         | in this
        
       | ainar-g wrote:
       | Here[1] is the video. At the time of me writing this comment, the
       | ratio is 53 likes to 15,486 dislikes.
       | 
       | [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDcvPf78g1k
        
         | trident5000 wrote:
         | Dont worry, they'll just get rid of those pesky little dislikes
         | to form cognizant conformity as their sponsors want pretty
         | soon.
        
         | AlexandrB wrote:
         | I think this reflects the fact that no one is particularly
         | happy with Youtube. Between the bans, increasingly aggressive
         | (and abusable) copyright strikes, and constantly shifting rules
         | around content and monetization most Youtubers I watch express
         | unhappiness about _some_ aspect of Youtube on a regular basis.
         | Many have started seeking alternative revenue streams to
         | mitigate platform risk.
        
           | TameAntelope wrote:
           | I'm sorry, but I simply can't believe that "no one is
           | particularly happy with YouTube" while so many people still
           | use it, including the vast majority of the people who are
           | supposedly "not particularly happy" with it.
           | 
           | When people ask, "Why hasn't someone disrupted YouTube?" I
           | think the more boring answer that keeps getting overlooked is
           | that it still meets the expectations of enough users, and the
           | dissatisfied constitute a small percentage.
           | 
           | > Many have started seeking alternative revenue streams to
           | mitigate platform risk.
           | 
           | What's wild about this is that the content creators doing
           | this _still_ use YouTube! Even after fully acknowledging the
           | problems, and actively mitigating those negative
           | consequences, they _still_ return to the platform.
           | 
           | I just don't see how that'd happen if it were actually a
           | "bad" service.
        
             | rurp wrote:
             | YouTube's brand and network effects are a huge moat, in a
             | market that is massively expensive to build a competitor
             | in. There are only a handful of companies in the world with
             | the available tech talent and capital to create a serious
             | competitor and they apparently aren't interested in trying
             | to attack that moat at this time.
             | 
             | YouTube can absolutely be widely disliked and keep chugging
             | along for the foreseeable future. All it needs to do is not
             | be so bad that people would rather spend their time on
             | something completely different. There is no BingTube with a
             | robust ecosystem that users can easily jump to.
        
             | _jal wrote:
             | Youtube wants to be a cable company. Every pageview over
             | there is a pile of demands to subscribe and sign in, before
             | you even get to the ads.
             | 
             | The idea that I'd pay them $65/mo to not look at a bucket
             | of ass when I browse over to Youtube is nuts. I don't pay
             | for "real" cable, why would I pay $700/yr. for a video site
             | I occasionally follow links to?
             | 
             | If you don't like the word 'bad', try 'delusional'.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | onepointsixC wrote:
             | Youtube has operated at best break even revenue, but mostly
             | at a loss for years. Who has the money necessary to do that
             | for years and years?
        
               | munk-a wrote:
               | Microsoft could - along with Apple - but I think both of
               | those companies are way too smart to try and enter the
               | market now.
               | 
               | Youtube gets a sort of pass for the crap it's pulling
               | since it's pretty much alone (Sorry - who's this Vimeo
               | fellow you're talking about?) but any other major video
               | service would be held up in comparison against Youtube,
               | as is the way with society, the negative will shine
               | through. If you start writing video suggestion algorithms
               | today how long will it take you to be confident that
               | "Pussy cat strolling across the back porch on a wet
               | afternoon" isn't immediately followed up by WAP?
        
               | camjohnson26 wrote:
               | Alphabet does. Most of their services run at a loss but
               | they make so much from ad revenue it doesn't matter.
        
             | Causality1 wrote:
             | It's not an objectively bad service, in a vacuum. It's a
             | bad service compared to itself from the past.
        
             | camjohnson26 wrote:
             | Where are they going to go? It's the only decently
             | monetized platform.
        
             | ainar-g wrote:
             | > When people ask, "Why hasn't someone disrupted YouTube?"
             | I think the more boring answer that keeps getting
             | overlooked is that it still meets the expectations of
             | enough users, and the dissatisfied constitute a small
             | percentage.
             | 
             | I've seen a couple of attempts come and go. The ones that
             | wrote a post-mortem after closing often emphasised how many
             | resources--human, software, and hardware--video hosting
             | websites consume. Not even because of the storage or the
             | reencoding, but the sheer amount of bandwidth one needs to
             | run such things globally. And it won't get profitable until
             | a few years later, if ever. The goog is simply one of the
             | few companies that can actually afford doing that.
             | 
             | I personally have been glad that alternatives like
             | Nebula[1] are popping up still. Even if their model is
             | different.
             | 
             | [1]: https://watchnebula.com/
        
             | t-writescode wrote:
             | > I simply can't believe that "no one is particularly happy
             | with YouTube" while so many people still use it
             | 
             | Are you familiar with cable television?
        
             | cbozeman wrote:
             | More troll posts... I guess people haven't seen your
             | username enough yet to realize what your game is, so on
             | behalf of those who haven't picked up on it:
             | 
             | The reason YouTube has no competitor yet is because you'd
             | need $10 billion just to get the platform off the ground -
             | that's servers, developers, datacenters, peering
             | agreements, etc.
             | 
             | Very few people have $10 billion lying around, and _no one_
             | is interested in tackling Google on their home turf.
        
             | munk-a wrote:
             | Youtube being a place to put videos for free is pretty hard
             | to casually compete with when your pockets need to match
             | google's. I've been surprised to see YouTube actually
             | partially out-compete twitch for streaming and entrench
             | itself as a place where a lot of old media places its
             | broadcast (from PBS to the Colbert Report).
             | 
             | For the first time I think they've got a real competitor
             | though - Nebula has managed to somehow eek out a year long
             | survival and is now scooping up a lot of creators on the
             | educational/informational side of things - and it looks
             | like the platform is essentially a co-op structurally where
             | everyone involved is getting a much larger share of the
             | take home. I think the big question coming up for Nebula is
             | what it will do about "The Algorithm" - will they try and
             | create a suggested feed and invest into that sort of
             | algorithmic video promotion or entrench harder into the
             | "see what you subscribe" approach that will end up hurting
             | small creator discoverability - oh also their platform
             | needs some UX work but I don't think that will be a serious
             | concern.
             | 
             | The interesting long term view for me is that I think
             | subscription based services are going to win out over the
             | freemium ones as those freemium ones continue to dig deeper
             | and deeper into the dark magics of advertiser based revenue
             | - freemium services aren't free, instead of demanding cash
             | for your product they're devaluving their product to recoup
             | their costs.
        
               | philwelch wrote:
               | Nebula is in a rough place. It's essentially subsidized
               | by CuriosityStream and many of their founding creators
               | have pulled out of the project. More fundamentally,
               | Nebula is explicitly curated, which isn't an inherently
               | bad thing but it does mean they're unlikely to solve any
               | "freedom of expression" issues with YouTube. I see Nebula
               | less as a YouTube alternative and more as a premium
               | monetization mechanism for the small clique of YouTubers
               | who are involved in it.
        
         | itronitron wrote:
         | They're only mistake was not awarding this on April 1st.
        
         | jasonfarnon wrote:
         | they didn't rollout the no dislikes interface quick enough
        
         | himinlomax wrote:
         | Don't worry, Youtube is set to remove the dislike buttons.
        
         | Udik wrote:
         | > the ratio is 53 likes to 15,486 dislikes.
         | 
         | Don't worry, Youtube has already proposed to hide dislikes
         | numbers. That would be a good place to start.
        
       | spiritplumber wrote:
       | Kim Jong Un get 'Freedom Expression' Award Sponosred by North
       | Korea
        
       | okareaman wrote:
       | This feels like a clever ad campaign by YouTube trying too hard
       | to be ironic because Susan Wojcicki might actually deserve it
        
       | andrewclunn wrote:
       | The best comments on this thread are the dead ones. The best
       | YouTubers are the banned ones. The best books are the burned
       | ones.
        
       | zackees wrote:
       | 13k downvotes, 30 upvotes.
        
         | coolspot wrote:
         | It is 30 YouTube engineers testing if the upvote button still
         | works on the video after receiving tickets from upper
         | management saying that "it can't be that this video doesn't
         | have thousands of upvotes".
        
       | alwayshasbeen wrote:
       | Reminds me of when the president of a warring nation once won the
       | Nobel Peace Prize.
        
         | Blikkentrekker wrote:
         | He was given the award for outstanding achievement in "not
         | being George W. Bush".
         | 
         | One is very often compared to one's praedecessors.
        
           | knuthsat wrote:
           | Yeah, then he ended up being a bigger warmonger than Bush.
           | 
           | But I believe OP meant other warmongers that got the prize
           | too.
        
         | carabiner wrote:
         | They could just rename it the War Prize. Definitely the most
         | controversial of the Nobels:
         | https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nobel-prize-peace/war-and...
        
         | iab wrote:
         | I always think about Richard Feynmans take on awards and honors
         | whenever these things get brought up:
         | https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fes-kqRDRoY
        
           | realsimplesynd wrote:
           | I wonder if there is a correlation between being super good
           | and having a disdain for awards or not.
        
             | capableweb wrote:
             | Do you have a disdain for awards?
        
         | Igelau wrote:
         | You're going to have to be more specific than that :\
        
           | speps wrote:
           | He means Obama
        
             | spaetzleesser wrote:
             | Obama's main achievement at the time he received the Noble
             | was that he wasn't Bush. Worst peace prize ever.
        
             | sneak wrote:
             | GP meant this has happened more than once.
        
       | ttt0 wrote:
       | A brief story of free expression on YouTube:
       | 
       | At some point they implemented what they called a 'Limited
       | state', which stripped almost every functionality, like comments,
       | likes, embedding or sharing on videos that _did not violate their
       | ToS_ , but were simply disliked by YouTube. They removed it after
       | a while, I assume because of Streisand effect, but I'm not sure.
       | 
       | Then they changed their ToS that they could ban you for literally
       | no reason whatsoever. They retracted that since as well, but are
       | still doing basically just that, it just gives them plausible
       | deniability I guess.
        
       | bsaul wrote:
       | it almost reads like an oil company sponsoring an environmental
       | ngo working on wildlife preservation.
        
         | ganafagol wrote:
         | You mean slonsoring an environmental achievements award which
         | the oil company wins itself?
        
         | sigstoat wrote:
         | that at least has some positive benefit.
        
           | srcmap wrote:
           | And the winner is Exxon.
        
         | Grustaf wrote:
         | No it doesn't. Oil companies do that all the time, and it's
         | great that at least of their money go to something worthwhile.
         | 
         | In your analogy, it would be like Shell awarding Shell for its
         | environmental work, while not doing any.
        
       | mkl wrote:
       | Bigger discussions: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26880262
       | and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26875971
        
         | nprz wrote:
         | I'm not sure how the HN ranking algorithm works, but
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26880262 seems to have
         | been removed from the front page despite receiving 350+ upvotes
         | within an hour of posting.
        
           | jdsully wrote:
           | There is a "flamewar" filter that derates content with too
           | many back and forth replies.
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | [dupe] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26880262
        
       | idownvoted wrote:
       | Just a misunderstanding. The "Free Expression" award goes to
       | overachievers in the field of redefining the "expression" of
       | "freedom".
       | 
       | Hey, which soon-to-be-fired sub-contractor forgot to turn off the
       | downvotes on YouTube?
        
       | cryptica wrote:
       | I refreshed the HN home page and, for a brief moment, on the same
       | page there was "YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki Gets 'Freedom
       | Expression' Award Sponsored by YouTube" right above another link
       | about YouTube CEO banning videos which don't align with COVID19
       | WHO guidelines...
       | 
       | We live in a clown world.
       | 
       | Even if people thought that what she did was a good thing (which
       | is debatable), it's a ridiculous idea to reward someone for
       | enabling 'free speech' when in fact they've been suppressing it.
       | 
       | That makes no sense at all. It's cringeworthy that anyone would
       | not realize that this award is a prank.
       | 
       | I wonder if the people who issued this award and the person
       | receiving it know that it's a prank...
        
       | jollybean wrote:
       | Let this be a lesson to all: intelligence does not in any way
       | correlate with self awareness. It's likely that 'smart' people
       | are just as likely to be unaware of their own follies or
       | inabilities, I would argue, maybe more so as a lot of smart
       | people tend to be 'inwardly focused' and less concerned about
       | their direct environment.
       | 
       | This kind of thing happens all the time among Exec. level, but
       | normally we'd expect it from Ford CEO, not Google types. It may
       | be an odd sign of industry maturity.
       | 
       | That said, we shouldn't discount how often this kind of stuff
       | actually does work. Watching the crowd at the Oracle conf. eat up
       | Larry Ellison's huffery as through he was some kind of market
       | visionary was the lesson at the other end of the spectrum, and
       | it's that 'If you're rich and stand on stage and say something
       | that 'sounds credible', a lot of people with just believe it'. Of
       | course there's more to it than that.
       | 
       | But this one is Comedy Gold.
       | 
       | It might be a sign that Susan does not have a fully trusted team
       | around her ... I would beg my boss in stark words to not do
       | something so ridiculous to themselves.
        
         | paganel wrote:
         | > It's likely that 'smart' people are just as likely to be
         | unaware of their own follies or inabilities,
         | 
         | Just look at the recent debacle with the proposed (and now
         | thankfully failed) football SuperLeague in Europe, you have 12
         | billionaire owners thinking that they could go ahead with
         | killing the spirit of the game that is ingrained in the social
         | fabric of the continent just like that, almost by fiat.
        
         | pulse7 wrote:
         | "It might be a sign that Susan does not have a fully trusted
         | team around her ..." => It might be a sign that team around her
         | is afraid to tell her how ridiculous this is... Maybe they made
         | good proposals in the past and where turned down and they now
         | don't want to make good suggestions again...
        
           | waterhouse wrote:
           | I'm currently tickling my brain with the hypothesis that this
           | is a next-level move by her team, to get her to publicly
           | "emphasize the importance of free speech and the role that
           | YouTube plays in protecting it", so that it will become more
           | inconvenient for her (or for the rest of Youtube) to do more
           | things that interfere with free speech.
           | 
           | Analogize this to publicly praising a corrupt general for
           | doing or planning something good that he hasn't actually been
           | doing. It's difficult for him to turn down the praise ("No, I
           | seriously haven't done anything to deserve this"), and
           | meanwhile it focuses eyes on him and pressures him to
           | actually _do_ the thing. I read about the tactic in a
           | fictional book once, I 'm sure it works. :-)
        
             | cbozeman wrote:
             | Well that won't work... former President Barack Obama
             | received the Nobel Peace prize but he went on to involve
             | the United States in additional foreign wars and went ham
             | with drone strikes.
        
             | ajxs wrote:
             | > "...so that it will become more inconvenient for her (or
             | for the rest of Youtube) to do more things that interfere
             | with free speech."
             | 
             | This is a good theory, I don't think it reflects the
             | situation though. She used her 'acceptance speech' for this
             | absurd accolade to emphasise the importance of censorship
             | in ensuring freedom, that war is peace, freedom is slavery,
             | so on so on. If this was the aim, it clearly didn't work.
             | 
             | Given her speech, the irony is either totally lost on her,
             | or she legitimately thinks that YouTube is such a
             | monolithic entity that the truth is whatever she says it
             | is.
        
           | slickrick216 wrote:
           | It might be worse. They could actually believe they are
           | promoting freedom of expression by silencing people. Pushed
           | straight past delusion into faith.
        
         | Grustaf wrote:
         | I think it says much more about how they see the consumers.
         | They're probably counting on 99% of people not noticing the
         | absurdity of it, or the irony in boasting about your industrial
         | scale censorship when accepting your free speech award.
        
           | belval wrote:
           | Yeah but even then I feel it shows they do not understand
           | their audience. Hating on Javascript/consoles/Windows/OS X is
           | something we nerds do. Free speech on YouTube is something
           | I've seen discussed in friends groups that I would consider
           | "normal people".
        
         | itronitron wrote:
         | It also indicates to me that the leadership at Alphabet is
         | totally out to lunch. I would have thought they had the sense
         | to stop this but apparently not.
        
         | cryptica wrote:
         | I would even make the case that self-awareness and success may
         | be inversely correlated in fact.
         | 
         | I've heard many people say similar things over the years... Why
         | is that? Is it some kind of kin selection? Is this total lack
         | of self-awareness a requirement for getting into positions of
         | power?
         | 
         | It's so obvious, I even wonder if they're just pretending to be
         | hypocrites? It seems so simple and obvious, how can they not
         | see the logical contradiction?
         | 
         | Are most of our leaders complete nutjobs?
         | 
         | Maybe humanity is a hierarchy with all the nutjobs at the top,
         | mirroring back their insanity inside their filter bubbles; not
         | realizing that their lives have nothing to do with reality.
        
           | jollybean wrote:
           | It's probably a lop sided u-shape. Most people lacking in
           | self-awareness are either really smart or true outcasts, with
           | 'high conscientious + good communicators' occupying most
           | middle management ... but it does take a kind of hubris
           | sometimes to overlook one's faults, even worse, to completely
           | ignore them otherwise. Without being controversial I see
           | hints of this in Jobs, Ellison, Trump, Musk, Page, Zuck etc.
           | (again I'm not condemning here, if any one of us put our
           | thoughts online consistently there'd be a few we would
           | seriously regret).
        
         | zouhair wrote:
         | "Smart" and "educated" people are the easiest to fool[0].
         | 
         | [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbwWL5ezA4g
        
       | GuB-42 wrote:
       | Isn't it standard practice not to allow people involved in the
       | process to participate?
       | 
       | I mean, even if you deserve it, it is an obvious conflict of
       | interest and makes the award worthless.
       | 
       | I mean, if say, Tesla sponsors an electric car award and a Tesla
       | car wins, it will sound like a farce. Even though it would be
       | expected for a Tesla car to win an electric car award in an
       | independent contest.
        
         | mc32 wrote:
         | At least at radio stations they have the decency to not
         | publicly allow their staff to win on-air prizes.
        
       | rodgerd wrote:
       | Perhaps Google can give themselves an "Ethics in AI" award, while
       | they're at it.
        
       | TurkishPoptart wrote:
       | This is the most Soviet thing I've heard in a while. The Ministry
       | of Culture awards itself for upholding the Soviet principles of
       | cultural enlightenment!
        
       | JoshTko wrote:
       | For the past few months, my youtube recommendations have gone
       | down noticeably in quality. I really wonder what management is
       | prioritizing.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-04-20 23:01 UTC)