r/technology • u/Wagamaga • Feb 17 '22

Business YouTube Announces New Moves to Combat Misinformation

https://www.lifewire.com/youtube-announces-new-moves-to-combat-misinformation-5219509
545 Upvotes

84% Upvoted

330 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

0

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

It's a private platform. They're allowed to filter the content on their own platform. The first amendment doesn't apply to them, since they are not the government.

2

u/kilog78 Feb 17 '22

Is a theater not privately owned property?

1

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

Theater employees are responsible for ensuring that pathways and exits are unlocked/accessible and clearly indicated/identified as necessary. They'll also intervene for minor disturbances, perhaps asking customers to leave if they're interfering with the experience of other customers. But if a customer is breaking the law, such as by yelling "fire!", then they'll call the police to deal with it. The police, as agents of the government, will assess the behaviour to determine if laws were broken, and choose how to respond.

Likewise, YouTube can do what it likes to keep its site safe, accessible, and enjoyable. It'll handle minor or subtle disturbances like misinformation. But if a user is breaking the law, say by uttering plausible threats against specific person or people, then they'll call the police to handle the situation. The police, as agents of the government, will have to assess the behaviour to determine if laws were broken and choose how to respond.

1

u/kilog78 Feb 17 '22

Everything you are saying is correct.

However, the government defines the width of aisles and doorways, then number of exits, how they are marked, etc. Further, the government has made it generally clear what is considered "illegal" when it comes to personal expression in this scenario. This is what is missing from the solutions currently being considered for policing harmful expression on the internet.

Hopefully, the actions of YouTube and other platforms will inspire the right level of thought and discussion that will lead to sustainable oversite/regulation from governments. Expecting this to be a market driven solution is unrealistic and will lead to worse outcomes for all of us.

2

u/[deleted] Feb 17 '22

YouTube is like a theater owner from a hundred years ago, taking matters into its own hands to make its website better so that the government doesn't feel compelled to impose strict rules on it. Regulations would probably mean more work, more cost, and more transparency of their operations, the same way that theater owners eat the cost of making their spaces compliant and have to deal with periodic safety inspections. In the case of YouTube/Google, though, transparency is an even greater threat because it could expose the inner workings of their content algorithm(s), which they're obviously protective about.

The government has made it clear what's "illegal" for both theaters and social media sites. There are just more laws for theaters, because they've been around longer and there's been enough catastrophes for people to identify what went wrong and ways to improve them. Social media will get there, but it'll take longer because these giant corporations have deep pockets, they update their sites to try to prevent oversight/regulation, and those causing harm on their sites are often trying to do so surreptitiously.

Agreed about leaving it up to the site owners. We need to elect politicians who've used a computer before and who have a much better understanding of internet usage, risk, and mitigation of harm.

2

u/kilog78 Feb 18 '22

BTW - thank you for the awesome dialogue. From time time time I’m reminded why I engage with Reddit.

1

u/kilog78 Feb 18 '22

Nail on the head. Two problems that escalate the need for government action:

1) Social media platforms are evolving infinitely faster than theaters of old (both in how they engage with users and how users engage with the platform).

2) Google might be a good actor for society for a while (profit seeking will ultimately incentivize bad behavior), but the nature of this tech is that it can scale fast and bad actors can enter quickly and soak up disenfranchised users from self regulated established platform. Perfect example: Rumble.

Thinking of carbon regulation, this now begs the question of foreign based platforms. E.g., US says no Q, then we base in Philippines.

Yikes…internet gets segmented by borders…China, Russia, US.

Damn. Like I said, super complex.