zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. restin+(OP)[view] [source] 2019-06-14 18:52:04
That is an apples to oranges comparison, Youtube is a platform not an institution. It is open to all videos, provided they meet certain agreed upon guidelines, and should not be responsible for censoring content based on individual opinions.

I don't think that the recommendation is broken at all, in fact it works astonishingly well for the vast majority of people. The fact that there are a few bad actors is also present in the banking industry, (Wells Fargo for instance), to use your own bad comparison.

replies(1): >>munk-a+r
2. munk-a+r[view] [source] 2019-06-14 18:55:00
>>restin+(OP)
YouTube is asserting editorial and publishing rights when it promotes certain videos, if it were a pure video hosting site (providing a link to uploaded videos for people to do with as they please) then I'd agree they were just a platform, but a newspaper isn't a platform and neither is YouTube.
replies(1): >>restin+t2
◧◩
3. restin+t2[view] [source] [discussion] 2019-06-14 19:08:14
>>munk-a+r
Youtube is asserting on behalf of people who own the publishing rights and not on behalf of themselves. This is an important distinction. Youtube is not the same as a Newspaper in any way shape or form, I don't really understand your comparison.
[go to top]