[HN Gopher] Subscriptions Drive Views of Extremist Videos on You...
___________________________________________________________________
Subscriptions Drive Views of Extremist Videos on YouTube
Author : alephnerd
Score : 11 points
Date : 2024-11-03 20:00 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (home.dartmouth.edu)
(TXT) w3m dump (home.dartmouth.edu)
| cardanome wrote:
| Effectively disabling dislikes is what has led to this mess in
| the first place.
|
| If your algorithm takes takes the like and dislike ratio into
| account for what videos are shown then people are encouraged to
| create content that is not offensive to the majority of people.
| There is a natural self-policing and extreme takes get less
| visibility.
|
| If you optimize for engagement, well we all know that spreading
| hate and general negativity generates the most engagement. So
| content creators will focus on that kind of content. There is no
| way for the moderate majority of the user base to keep them in
| check.
| djaychela wrote:
| Dislikes are not disabled, just the count is not visible. You
| can still see the ratio in your creator studio.
|
| The algorithm is optimising for view time, I think that's far
| more of a variable than Dislikes, and people will dislike
| content but still watch a significant portion of it.
| cardanome wrote:
| Yeah, that is what I meant when I said it is optimizing for
| engagement i.e. view time. Early youtube algo did take
| dilikes into accound and tried to optimize for quality.
| Dislikes are effectively disabled.
|
| A high dislike count isn't something content creators need to
| worry about, hence the more extrem content.
| hhh wrote:
| It is something they need to worry about. It's just less
| effective for brigading videos.
|
| Except now those people over-focus on the chrome extension
| that records the like:dislike ratio of videos (of extension
| users only) and they end up filtering themselves by
| thinking it's authoritative for the overall view
| population.
| Syonyk wrote:
| > _Given the challenges of trying to characterize the content of
| every single video viewed, the researchers focused on the type of
| YouTube channels people watched. They compiled lists of channels
| that had been identified as alternative or extreme by journalists
| and academics and then examined how often a participant visited
| videos from those channels._
|
| > _Alternative channels included content for men's rights
| activists, anti-social justice warriors, and intellectual dark
| web material; extreme channels included white supremacist, alt-
| right, and extremist material._
|
| Eh...
|
| Relying on "journalists and academics disliking a channel enough
| to claim it's extreme," but then not bothering to actually go
| look at the details of the material watched, sounds pretty lazy
| to me if you're trying to make this sort of argument.
|
| Or to at least _sample_ a reasonable cross section (perhaps
| videos that showed up in a lot of the monitored profiles) and
| make sure they 're generally consistent with what the claimed
| nature of the channel is.
| 23B1 wrote:
| The academy's fear of 'harmful' words has become more dangerous
| than the words themselves.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-11-03 23:01 UTC)