SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
On June 5th, YouTube announced in a post on its official blog that it is going to be:
Removing more hateful and supremacist content from YouTube
by specifically prohibiting videos alleging that a group is superior in order to justify discrimination, segregation or exclusion based on qualities like age, gender, race, caste, religion, sexual orientation or veteran status.
Finally, we will remove content denying that well-documented violent events, like the Holocaust or the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, took place.
Reducing borderline content and raising up authoritative voices
In January, we piloted an update of our systems in the U.S. to limit recommendations of borderline content and harmful misinformation
We're looking to bring this updated system to more countries by the end of 2019. Thanks to this change, the number of views this type of content gets from recommendations has dropped by over 50% in the U.S. Our systems are also getting smarter about what types of videos should get this treatment, and we'll be able to apply it to even more borderline videos moving forward. As we do this, we'll also start raising up more authoritative content in recommendations
Continuing to reward trusted creators and enforce our monetization policies
we are strengthening enforcement of our existing YouTube Partner Program policies. Channels that repeatedly brush up against our hate speech policies will be suspended from the YouTube Partner program, meaning they can't run ads on their channel or use other monetization features like Super Chat.
In an article discussing this, Silicon Valley reporter Casey Newton of The Verge notes that this "is expected to result in the removal of thousands of channels across YouTube."
The crackdown goes into effect today and will "ramp up" over the next few days.
Aristarchus adds from Time:
The video streaming company says it has already made it more difficult to find and promote such videos, but it's now removing them outright. YouTube will also prohibit videos that deny certain proven events have taken place, such as the Holocaust.
The changes come as YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other online services face mounting concern that the services allow, and in some cases foster , extremism.
YouTube's new policies will take effect immediately. Specifically, the service is banning videos "alleging that a group is superior in order to justify discrimination, segregation or exclusion." The ban applies to a range of characteristics, including race, sexual orientation and veteran status.
[...] The companies have said they are walking the balance between creating safe spaces while also protecting freedom of expression. With little government oversight on online material, internet companies have become the arbiters for what is and isn't allowed.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Pino P on Monday June 10 2019, @08:50PM (3 children)
"Yes, we're entitled to present evidence supporting our opinions."
In a trial, "facts" mean evidence. In context, "alternative facts" probably meant "you've presented your evidence of a claim, and we are preparing to present our evidence to the contrary."
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 10 2019, @09:23PM
You are not quite correct.
Source. [thelawdictionary.org]
In other words, facts are actual occurrences which the trier of fact has found to be real, almost equivalent to the definition that most people subscribe to. Facts are not subject to opinion, if they are then they are not facts. "Alternative facts" is code for, "you are wrong about what reality is and we want to substitute our interpretation," and is usually proposed by somebody not conversive with what the facts actually are. The correct form to dispute fact is to state, "That is not a fact," followed by, "this is..." Not attempt to establish that an "alternative" fact exists which would require an alternate reality to exist to hold it.
(Score: 4, Informative) by edIII on Monday June 10 2019, @09:39PM
Uhhhhhh, no. Alternative facts in this case refers to that scarecrow Kelly Anne responding to facts contrasted with Whitehouse lies by saying, "These are alternative facts". Meaning, you can have two diametrically opposing statements of information, one a fact, one a lie, and somehow they both become equal in worth.
That's what the alt-right means when they say alternative facts. It's to give their propagandist lies the same provenance as an established fact.
For example, the world being 6,000 years old, and Noah's Ark existing, are alternative facts.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Tuesday June 11 2019, @06:09AM
All too often, what happens is that both sides simply 'cite facts' meaning mentioning things they believe.
You want real facts? You need to sift through evidence.
Independent media is not uniformly of high quality, but legacy media is nearly uniformly low quality. They are constantly citing 'facts' without evidence, and often they're simply wrong. And demonstrably so.
Do they respond by increasing their quality controls? No, they respond by smearing the portal where critical voices are most numerous.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?