YouTube Executive Says the Video Service Doesn't Drive Its Users Down the Rabbit Hole (bbc.com) 124
YouTube has defended its video recommendation algorithms, amid suggestions that the technology serves up increasingly extreme videos. On Thursday, a BBC report explored how YouTube had helped the Flat Earth conspiracy theory spread. But the company's new managing director for the UK, Ben McOwen Wilson, said YouTube "does the opposite of taking you down the rabbit hole". From a report: He told the BBC that YouTube worked to dispel misinformation and conspiracies. But warned that some types of government regulation could start to look like censorship. YouTube, as well as other internet giants such as Facebook and Twitter, have some big decisions to make. All must decide where they draw the line between freedom of expression, hateful content and misinformation. And the government is watching. It has published a White Paper laying out its plans to regulate online platforms. In his first interview since starting his new role, Ben spoke about the company's algorithms, its approach to hate speech and what it expects from the UK government's "online harms" legislation. [...] YouTube has never explained exactly how its algorithms work. Critics say the platform offers up increasingly sensationalist and conspiratorial videos. Mr McOwen Wilson disagrees. "It's what's great about YouTube. It is what brings you from one small area and actually expands your horizon and does the opposite of taking you down the rabbit hole," he says.
Pewdipipeline (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
If you post to Slashdot that "videogames cause violence", or a video explaining same, you're a troll. No one wants or needs to repeat that tired argument.
Much in the same way, if you post that "edgy YouTube videos cause violence", you're a troll. Updating the moral panic to what the kids are into 10 years later doesn't change anything.
You might as well be entertaining and say "we got trouble here on Slashdot. Trouble with a capital "T" and that rhymes with "P" and that stands for pool!".
Re: (Score:2)
Other comments that inflame the censorious because it upsets their already-settled worldviews, yielding a downmod:
1. "Linux isn't as secure as you think. If it were on hundreds of millions of computers, and thus suffering the attentions of 10,000 hackers, it would be leaking weeky problems like Windows."
2. It's ok to work to ameliorate global warming, but be careful you don't overdo it because you might induce an ice age, which have come on in as few as a couple of years. All you need is a summer where th
Re:Pewdipipeline (Score:4, Insightful)
Because it's a troll, and all the data shows the exact opposite.
YouTube's recommendations are biased to steering people to accepted, approved, mainstream, liberal, etc. videos. YouTube keeps adjusting their algorithms and putting their thumb on the scale to make that bias heavier and heavier.
The fact that people still go out of their way to find, watch, and share videos that YouTube, legacy media clowns, etc. don't like is what the whole "rabbit hole" and "radicalization" rhetoric is about. They want to outright censor the platform. They already do, but they want more censorship.
Am I "going down the rabbit hole" when I watch one video from Jas. Townsend & Son https://www.youtube.com/user/j... [youtube.com] and then watch another, then explicitly look for that channel when YouTube decides it want to instead burn all the recommended slots on CNN, Fox News, and goddamned Fortnite streams non stop? What about when I watch a Numberphile video and then branch out to Mathologer? Or what about when I watch an Isaac Arthur video and then, being a wonderful person, land upon What the Math? But god forbid that I watch a 15 minute left leaning video from TLDR News or the Beeb about the latest Brexit shitshow and then see a 1 minute pure parliament clip from the Daily Mail channel!
Let the damned algorithm work, stop influencing it. Let people watch what they want to watch.
I can honestly say I'm not a troll (Score:3)
As for YouTube, YouTube Favors the Establishment [youtube.com] first and foremost. After that they favor whatever gets them the most ad revenue.
And you and me are terrible examples. That's because we're highly politically aware. We wouldn't follow the rabbit hole because we're aware it exists. Here's a good video [youtube.com] fro
It doesn't hurt you because you're _aware_ (Score:2)
There's a host of wishy washy folks who are very susceptible to influence. They get hooked up with the alt-right from folks like Pewdiepie, Alpha Omega Sin & John Tron. This happens because a) those YouTubers follow alt-right channels and
Re: (Score:1)
YouTube's recommendations are biased to steering people to accepted, approved, mainstream, liberal, etc. videos. YouTube keeps adjusting their algorithms and putting their thumb on the scale to make that bias heavier and heavier
Yeah, except that's pure bullshit. Youtube's algorithm is based simply on what you've watched and given the thumbs up or down to. If you and another user like video X and that user also liked video Y, you are more likely to be shown video Y. The real problem is that in America, the average person is actually left of center. Left of center vids get more likes because more people like them. Conservatives are deceived into thinking there are more of themselves because of how they dominate politics by voti
You do know the right wing is mainstream, right? (Score:1, Troll)
Re: (Score:1)
Yup, listen to that anarcho communist talk about implicit bias and how microaggressions lead to genocide. So well sourced.
These Cardinal Richelieu types are parasites, as are all these other moralizing busybodies who want to virtue signal at someone else's expense.
I don't think Pew Di Pie's a racist (Score:2)
The right wing has answers. Horrible answers that are comp
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
(-1 Overrated)
Re: (Score:2)
If you're still on Slashdot for whatever reason and you're not browsing at -1 and loading all comments, you're doing it wrong.
Yes, there's spam and trolling and copy pasta. So what? Scroll past it or have a laugh.
Re: (Score:3)
No more Youtube (and my son will literally freak out)
I think you have bigger problems than YT.
Re: (Score:2)
If your son will literally freak out at the prospect of no more YouTube, then you need to let that freakout happen and let the consequence for it be no more YouTube and no more cell phone and no more Fortnite and no more Minecraft.
The executive is wrong (Score:5, Insightful)
I like technical stuff and historical stuff, and thus I subscribe to many youtube channels where people fix up old machinery, or disassemble electronics, or go into the technical details of curio-and-relic era firearms.
I keep getting search suggestions for wingut political garbage. I'm not interested in who owned who in some kind of BS argument. I'm not interested in that jerkoff kid that keeps trying to prank political candidates. I'm not interested in the animated blowup doll advocating carrying pistols in her spanx.
I am interested in the history of John Browning's semiautomatic pistols, because those pistols both led to WWI (in the case of the F&N pistol used to assassinate Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife) and helped win WWI (in the case of the Colt M1911 and various F&N designs fielded by European armies) and how the Browning designs evolved and informed on each other through the course of history. I don't really want to hear the opinions of ammosexuals.
It's like how I like cars, but I don't really want to hear Doug DeMuro's underinformed, poorly-scripted rants about cars that he has next to no actual experience with, yet those keep popping up in the feed too, despite putting those rather useless videos on ignore.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's like how I like cars, but I don't really want to hear Doug DeMuro's underinformed....
This is really amusing, as it's really close to how YouTube starts one down the rabbit hole. I'm sure there are many people with vaguely similar interests as yours who have never heard of Doug DeMuro, but who will now watch at least part of his channel to see why you mentioned him in a Slashdot post. Or in other words:
Doug, is that you?
Re: (Score:2)
This is really amusing, as it's really close to how YouTube starts one down the rabbit hole.
But this is a new rabbit hole, and not an arbitrary one, but one specially chosen by YouTube/Google.
Its one thing when the algorithm presents you with stuff similar to what other people chose to watch after viewing the things you view, its another when the algorithm presents you with stuff similar to what other people watched after google autoplayed it for those other people after viewing the things you view.
And this is how they will claim they arent censoring. They are currently artificially influenci
Re: (Score:2)
I keep getting search suggestions for wingut political garbage. I'm not interested in who owned who in some kind of BS argument. I'm not interested in that jerkoff kid that keeps trying to prank political candidates. I'm not interested in the animated blowup doll advocating carrying pistols in her spanx.
I couldn't agree more.
YT is a vast treasure trove of absolute crap.
There is a lot of good stuff on there, well thought out, interesting and valuable.
Then there is everything else, most of which is garbage.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
You can also test this with a clean slate browser on a CGNAT internet connection (i.e. one where the IP address is not tied to you personally). Google recommends terrible content because it bases its decisions on "engagement". Interactions with Youtube cause ad impressions, so Google wants you to interact. Incendiary videos get the most comments. People who comment are returning visitors. Google doesn't recommend garbage content, it just recommends "engaging" videos that happen to be garbage, because it's e
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
They changed it to offer videos they think are offering different views, so you don't get just one side of the argument. Of course it was instantly gamed, the flat earthers immediately started pretending to be debunking videos and the like.
Re: (Score:3)
They changed it to offer videos they think are offering different views, so you don't get just one side of the argument. Of course it was instantly gamed, the flat earthers immediately started pretending to be debunking videos and the like.
Except that this assumes that I'm interested in arguments.
Watching Big Clive teardown a death shower head or watching AvE show a horrible bushing on a $1000 track saw doesn't engender a political debate. The only debate is whether the shower head is actually going to kill someone or if the saw's manfuacturer's choice to use a bushing is actually a bad design or if it's adequate for the application despite being cheap.
Re: (Score:2)
a horrible bushing on a $1000 track saw doesn't engender a political debate. The only debate is whether the shower head is actually going to kill someone or if the saw's manfuacturer's choice to use a bushing is actually a bad design or if it's adequate for the application despite being cheap.
I used to know a guy (a professional) who had one of those, the fesstool tracksaw. He said it was a very good saw, nice clean straight cuts, with excellent dust extraction, but he actually used his £40 silv
Re:The executive is wrong (Score:4, Interesting)
My favorite case of this was with the Flat Earth videos. I had heard people complaining about them, but never seen one recommended. Then I added a couple of new rocketry-related channels. Suddenly, flat-earth debunking videos everywhere.
If easy to see why the algorithm did that. People debunking flat-earth stuff linking to space program stuff. It's kind of silly, because it's just as obvious that the interest would only go one way - people watching space program stuff aren't likely to then watch flat earth stuff. Very dumb algorithm, but it's clear enough what's going on.
The same is pretty obvious for politics. People with extreme views will watch their obscure BS, then click over to more mainstream BS (all YT politics is BS). The embarrassingly bad algorithms then start recommending the extreme BS to people watching the mainstream BS, because, hey, some people watch both.
I don't think even a Google executive could be dumb enough not to understand how this works, even if they did have an MBA.
Perhaps the very fine programmers working on YouTube should read far enough into that dusty graph theory book they've had in a box since college to discover what a directed graph is.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think even a Google executive could be dumb enough not to understand how this works, even if they did have an MBA.
Never attribute to stupidity what you can attribute to malice.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd be amazed at what people can't understand when it's not in their interest to understand it.
Re: (Score:2)
I like technical stuff and historical stuff
Since I have the link on my clipboard: https://www.youtube.com/user/j... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, I watch their stuff from time to time. Not all of it interests me but some of it does.
Re: (Score:2)
Gun videos would also be popular among the right half of the wingnut population, so this makes sense. Though if Youtube's recommendation engine was smart at all, it would figure out that you never click on those videos and they aren't something that interests you
That's the biggest problems with recommendation engines IMHO, it is almost impossible for them to learn. I turned off the "Tivo suggestions" on my Tivo years ago, because it kept recommending 10 things I'd never watch for every 1 that I might.
Yeah. I am literally subscribed to only one youtube channel that's focused on firearms as its primary subject, C&Rsenal. I found them through "The Great War" because they provided good technical and historical information on the weapons that the major powers used in WWI. They go over development history that led up to the firearm that was used in the war, often delving somewhat into the biographies of those responsible for it, and the nature of feedback from the soldiers that used it, if there's any
Re: (Score:2)
I like technical stuff and historical stuff, and thus I subscribe to many youtube channels where people fix up old machinery, or disassemble electronics, or go into the technical details of curio-and-relic era firearms.
Your browsing profile sounds a lot like mine. Abom79, TOT, hand tool rescue all feature on yours?
I'm not super into firearms, but I did like the video on the gyrojet (more much more modern than your usual fare, but well worth a watch if you like techincal, obscure, interesting stuff).
I just watch Youtube for music and how too's (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and cat videos. Otherwise, yeah.
And Phillip Morris Exec says smoking is healthy! (Score:1)
I mean, it's not like his remuneration is tied to his company performing well or anything, right? We should TOTALLY take whatever he has to say at face value...
Decisions? (Score:3)
'YouTube, as well as other internet giants such as Facebook and Twitter, have some big decisions to make.'
Um, no they don't. The market makes the decisions and the only concern the business have are how to sell ads and services. It's not your personal soapbox, it's a platform owned by companies that SELL ads.
Jeeze... how hard is it for people to understand business.
Re: (Score:2)
No, politicians have different ideas about YouTube et al, so it's important for these companies to make sure that the right politician wins the election.
how hard is it for people to understand business
Exactly.
Re: (Score:2)
No, politicians have different ideas about YouTube et al, so it's important for these companies to make sure that the right politician wins the election.
I can tell you dont believe it, because you would also believe it to be a bad idea for Google to intentionally piss of over half of the politicians. Every conservative one, and quite a few far left ones as well, are pissed off at Google now. If they were so concerned about the ideas of the politicians that win, they wouldnt be pissing off such a large number of them, they would be silently donating to the campaigns of their opposition.
Now when Google gets regulated, its going to be by pissed off people.
Re: (Score:2)
'Google filters YouTube content'
YouTube has acceptable use standards, they set standards as to what content they choose to or not permit the content owners to host. Advertisers decide what or where they want their ads to be shown.
Google of course provides filters for users to find content the content owners decide to host there, it's one of prices you pay for watching ads. The filters are designed to provide users with relevant, high quality and useful result for users queries.
Maybe YouTube needs a Tone Detector (Score:2)
What I think would be great is some kind of YouTube Tone Detector, that could detect primarily negative videos.
That way I could filter them out if I chose, except maybe some exclusion list for very specific topics.
Mostly I just want to watch something light and upbeat when I go there, instead about half of recommendations are garbage whining videos about whatever. I don't want to even know they exist thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What I think would be great is some kind of YouTube Tone Detector, that could detect primarily negative videos.
Many YouTubers believe this already exists, and self-censor or get creative with word choice to avoid being flagged and demonitized. It gets a bit silly, saying things like "the bad guys in WWII" instead of "Nazis" when reviewing a WWII-themed video game, for fear of some bot labeling their video as extreme political content.
The YouTube bots have definitely achieved a chilling effect, but sure haven't done anything to address the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Many YouTubers know this to be true already, and self-censor or get creative with....
Fixed that for you.
Re:Fake outrage (Score:5, Interesting)
People are attacking Youtube because usually, they are the last to deplatform someone (usually Twitter first, then Facebook). They will demonetize, which affects virtually no-one as most controversial creators have set up a crowdfunding source or added paypal/crypto links to their videos. So, the outrage machine has set its sights on Youtube as they are often the last major platform for those who do not share the opinions of the (so-called) majority. They are continually trying to bully Youtube into kicking off people they don't like and this rabbit hole nonsense is just their latest attack vector.
Fuck (Score:1)
Kind of why I don't like Youtube much (Score:2, Informative)
He told the BBC that YouTube worked to dispel misinformation and conspiracies.
Look, I'm as frustrated as the next person, vis a vis things like Flat Earth, Anti-vax, etc. But I don't want google deciding what is "information" verses what is "disinformation." I just don't trust them long-term not to be self-serving. The cure is worse that the disease.
Anyone who does trust them has not been paying attention.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Reminds me of my favorite conspiracy video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
About lawn sprinkler water droplets creating mini rainbows and how that's definitely something that didn't happen 50 years ago.
I think he's right (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
none of them got crazy
The latter even landed on a TEDx talk
TED and TEDx and TEDwhatever "talks" are almost universally crazy, bullshit, or insipid pablum.
Re: (Score:2)
A quick search revealed this insane TEDx talk [youtube.com] about normalizing and accepting pedophilia. Full stop.
Nancy.com (Score:2)
"It's the opposite of the rabbit hole! We expand your minds by exposing you to other ideas! Nazis are directed to left-wing sites. Conservatives are directed to left-wing sites, and left wingers are directed to left-wing sites!"
When a channel like Forgotten Weapons (Score:2)
Definition of rabbit hole is too narrow? (Score:2)
Even before reading Search & Destroy I had concluded that YouTube was evil. Perfect match for today's google, eh?
The parts that are bothering me the most are not so much the ideological corruption (AKA self-brainwashing) from YouTube's pandering for eyeballs as the commercial corruption and the moral corruption. Commercially that's the professional criminals flogging pirated movies and TV shows and morally it's the regular folks who become inured to ignoring copyrights. Might remind you of Prohibition
All roads lead to John Oliver (Score:2)
Use a PC.
Find good channels to subscribe to.
Open subscriptions. Mouse over video previews and select 'watch later' clickbox for videos of interest.
Open watch later from left side menu. Click the video that begins the series.
Enjoy.
This is fun to watch (Score:2)
Youtube versus its own neural network system.
I bet on the NN.
Rabbit hole leading to an echo chamber ... (Score:2)
I commented about this before, back in January, in this comment: Rabbit hole leading to an echo chamber ... [slashdot.org].
I guess I will post the comment again:
Yeh.... (Score:2)
Don't tip the scales (Score:2)
I think tipping the scales is a very dangerous way to go for Google. Whether it's Youtube, your Google feed, or search results, tipping the scales is a very slippery slope.
1. If Youtube is your research platform I don't think the content is your problem.
2. Who defines center?
3. What happens when mainstream is wrong?
Mainstream is wrong (or lying) all the time. From Trevon Martin is an innocent young kid, the Earth is flat, the Sun revolves around the earth, humans are the only species to use tools, man did