At least when the Nobel committee awarded the peace prize to Obama before he trotted into the Middle East they have the excuse of not having a crystal ball into the future.
Here despite all evidence to the contrary and its being a commercial endeavor, which entails conflict of interest, they grant this antithesis to freedom of expression an award for freedom of expression. Excuse me if I feel disturbed by their apparent lack of awareness or gross farce.
>At least when the Nobel committee awarded the peace prize to Obama before he trotted into the Middle East they have the excuse of not having a crystal ball into the future.
That's not much of an excuse, typically people wait for after something happens to deliver an award for it.
It's a way better title indicating the corporate sponsored nature of the award and the blatant conflict of interest on the award committee and Youtube.
You'd think there would be at least one person involved with enough self-awareness to say, "You know, maybe we should disable comments and voting on this video."
You'd hope that there wouldn't be a single person involved with such a lack of self-awareness to suggest that a video about a freedom of expression award should have user expression blocked.
This right here. Many people say things like “Google would never…”, and they might be right. But that’s not what matters, what matters is people’s beliefs about what Google would do. And this is why Google should have absolutely no influence over your web browser, your programming language, etc. Again, that’s perceived influence, not actual influence. The fear exists regardless.
Lol YouTube giving their CEO an award for freedom of expression is just about the most Orwellian thing I’ve seen in a long, long time.
And it seems like they did it without it being a joke which is absurd and scary too. They are so far in their own bubble and echo chamber they have no idea what the real world thinks or cares.
Title changed does nothing dang, a youtube free expression award is paradoxical and ironic even before they awarded to themselves and by themselves I mean the CEO
Those dislikes are going to be removed soon. Only positivity is permitted. You can still downvote but the public will not be allowed to see signs of disapproval.
I just did a cursory search. This video was posted a few days ago, but there seems to be zero chatter from American news sites (at least, ones with recognizable names) about it - not even Fox. I'd expect at least some of them to be firing back about "trolls" and "sexists" harassing and insulting Susan Wojcicki, like what happened with [female-protagonist-led Hollywood movie]. The silence is interesting, given the previous narratives. I wonder what's different now.
Aside of the absurd nomination/awards: how come that YouTube is CEO-less company for media?
When FB screws up, Zuck's grim is everywhere in media, but when YouTube does the same orwellian stuff, it's just... YouTube, like there's no person behind it.
Rackspace did similar a few years back when they awarded their CEO with their most fanatical award or whatever it was called. Don't think he stayed at the company for much longer, either.
What's interesting is that the majority of her speech is discussing the suppression of free expression, saying how "authoritative" sources are given priority, advertiser-friendly videos are rewarded and given priority, and others are suppressed.
You can argue the necessity of those actions, but trying to call those actions examples of free expression is the kind of corporate double-speak that erodes trust.
Farcical. I was going to downvote it, but didn’t want to find myself surprise locked out of my Gmail account a few months from now with no explanation.
[+] [-] mc32|4 years ago|reply
Here despite all evidence to the contrary and its being a commercial endeavor, which entails conflict of interest, they grant this antithesis to freedom of expression an award for freedom of expression. Excuse me if I feel disturbed by their apparent lack of awareness or gross farce.
[+] [-] whatshisface|4 years ago|reply
That's not much of an excuse, typically people wait for after something happens to deliver an award for it.
[+] [-] ravenstine|4 years ago|reply
https://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/11/obama-le...
I don't really have much against Obama (and not like he couldn't accept it), but that was a real "oh brother" moment for me.
[+] [-] the-dude|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] greatgib|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jsnk|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fsflover|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thedanbob|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Anon1096|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jetrink|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] breakfastduck|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] blacktriangle|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] not1ofU|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] proactivesvcs|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] teddyh|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] notdang|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] plank_time|4 years ago|reply
And it seems like they did it without it being a joke which is absurd and scary too. They are so far in their own bubble and echo chamber they have no idea what the real world thinks or cares.
[+] [-] vmception|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nuisance-bear|4 years ago|reply
"Honors is epaulets. My pop pop taught me that." -RPF
[+] [-] thaumasiotes|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ofou|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] BitwiseFool|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] endominus|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DiabloD3|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Qw3r7|4 years ago|reply
But there is nothing stopping itself from being a joke and tone deaf!
Is there a way an award that is for industry that isnt the Nobel prize for something like this?
[+] [-] bpodgursky|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stackedinserter|4 years ago|reply
When FB screws up, Zuck's grim is everywhere in media, but when YouTube does the same orwellian stuff, it's just... YouTube, like there's no person behind it.
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] chaps|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] theparanoid|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TheAdamAndChe|4 years ago|reply
You can argue the necessity of those actions, but trying to call those actions examples of free expression is the kind of corporate double-speak that erodes trust.
[+] [-] the-dude|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] prezjordan|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] otterley|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dTal|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] grej|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bassman9000|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] bassman9000|4 years ago|reply
Presented by signature sponsor: YouTube
https://i.imgur.com/CwIpcbM.jpg
[+] [-] DevKoala|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vmception|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lvs|4 years ago|reply