Interesting People mailing list archives

Re Google Accused Of Making 'Profit From Hatred' As Major Advertisers Pull Out From YouTube


From: "Dave Farber" <farber () gmail com>
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2017 16:13:13 -0400




Begin forwarded message:

From: "Greg Brooks" <gregb () west-third com>
Date: March 18, 2017 at 3:09:56 PM EDT
To: <dave () farber net>
Subject: RE: [IP] Re Google Accused Of Making 'Profit From Hatred' As Major Advertisers Pull Out From YouTube
Reply-To: <gregb () west-third com>

Dave, for IP if you wish.

While I’m sympathetic to both Lauren’s and J.M.’s viewpoints, each reflects a certain comfort with authoritarian, 
do-this-not-that solutions.

To Lauren I say: Giving advertisers the tools to pull monetary support from content they find objectional is a 
granular, morally sound solution precisely because it reduces the decision making to the two parties with skin in the 
game: a content creator and an advertiser.

To J.M. I counter: I wish every business would support maximally open, unfettered speech. But when private companies 
start getting referred to as public infrastructure (and never with attendant compensation), that a risk flag for 
shareholders. Thinking of innovations like YouTube as public infrastructure sounds like a philosophical path to 
protecting both the resource and its users. But it can also lead to treating the resource like a public utility.

Greg Brooks
West Third Group

From: Dave Farber [mailto:farber () gmail com]
Sent: Saturday, March 18, 2017 7:40 AM
To: ip <ip () listbox com>
Subject: [IP] Re Google Accused Of Making 'Profit From Hatred' As Major Advertisers Pull Out From YouTube

Begin forwarded message:

From: "J.M. Porup" <jm () porup com>
Date: March 18, 2017 at 10:36:59 AM EDT
To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
    ip <ip () listbox com>
Subject: Re: [IP] Google Accused Of Making 'Profit From Hatred' As Major Advertisers Pull Out From YouTube

When private enterprise becomes public infrastructure, shouldn't the
rirst Amendment become Google's mandatory terms of service?

Censor the hate today, censor the dissent tomorrow...

jmp

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 04:24:18AM +0000, Dave Farber wrote:

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren () vortex com>
Date: Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:30 PM
Subject: [ NNSquad ] Google Accused Of Making 'Profit From Hatred' As Major
Advertisers Pull Out From YouTube
To: <nnsquad () nnsquad org>

Google Accused Of Making 'Profit From Hatred' As Major Advertisers Pull Out
From YouTube

https://www.forbes.com/sites/emmawoollacott/2017/03/17/google-accused-of-making-profit-from-hatred-as-major-advertisers-pull-out-from-youtube/#411d48ab75ad

"We've heard from our advertisers and agencies loud and clear
that we can provide simpler, more robust ways to stop their
ads from showing against controversial content," says UK
managing director Ronan Harris in a statement.  "While we have
a wide variety of tools to give advertisers and agencies
control over where their ads appear, such as topic exclusions
and site category exclusions, we can do a better job of
addressing the small number of inappropriately monetized
videos and content."  He adds that the company is now
reviewing its policies and plans to make changes.  However,
the cynic might note that these changes will, he says, 'give
brands more control over where their ads appear across YouTube
and the Google Display Network'. In other words, they will put
the ball in the advertisers' court.

-  - -

Let's be clear about this. As much as I love YouTube, the "we don't
always get it right" excuse has worn very thin in this context. These
kinds of vile, hate-filled videos should not be on YouTube in the
first place. Most of them are from established YT channels that churn
out this crap continually, with monetization providing them (and
Google) a steady income stream. YT users are routinely tossed off of
the platform for relatively minor offenses with little effective
recourse -- but these hate channels go and on. This isn't free speech,
it's free hate. Free racism. Free antisemitism. If Google doesn't have
the spine to remove them from the YT ecosystem, these channels should
not be permitted to monetize at all -- that income is what keeps these
hate machines churning. Show some backbone, Google.

--Lauren--
Your Google Experiences - https://vortex.com/google-suggestions
REPORT Fake News Here! - https://factsquad.com
uTube Recommendations - https://vortex.com/lauren-youtube

--
J.M. Porup
www.JMPorup.com

Archives | Modify Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now




-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/18849915-ae8fa580
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-aa268125
Unsubscribe Now: 
https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-32545cb4&post_id=20170318161320:52FF7112-0C17-11E7-AAEF-B153C3C49018
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Current thread: