1984 in 2018

[_canpakes]

Ceeboo, note the reason for Prager's lawsuit:

... demonetized ...

Prager isn't concerned so much with 'free speech' as he is 'free money'. Else why list it as the main complaint?

[_canpakes]

There is only one Facebook.

Really? You don't say.

There used to only be one MySpace. And today, there's only one LinkedIn. And so on, for virtually every company. Today's startup is tomorrow's industry giant. That doesn't mean that they owe you anything. So much for your brilliantly useless observation.

Can you tell me how lack of access to Facebook is inherently limiting to starting a business in America?

This entitlement act of yours is pretty amusing. ; )

[_Kishkumen]

Honestly, I don't entirely disagree with what you posted about google and youtube. I don't think companies should be able to arbitrarily discriminate. I think the baker who refuses to bake cakes for gay couples should have to put up a sign of his "terms and conditions" for everyone to see much like google and youtube do. His bigotry should be displayed prominently for any would be patrons. Same with google or youtube if they choose to not accommodate certain viewpoints, they should say so right up front.

If they break their terms and conditions, then I think they should be held accountable. If prager didn't break the rules that youtube agreed to do business under, then I see no reason why he shouldn't be able to seek compensation. If he is being arbitrarily targeted and a portion of his livelihood is derived from youtube and based on the marketplace and rules they have created, he may have a leg to stand on here.

That said, the algorithms they use change constantly and reach to all kinds of triggers like brigading, fake traffic, profitability, popularity, connectivity with competing sites, competitors and partnerships, copyright conflicts, etc. There are dozens of reasons pragers videos could have been pushed lower in searches or put into a queue for review. I will be interested to see how that turns out.

I have a friend on Facebook who was marketing his music there. He noticed that due to changes in their software few people were seeing his music promotions anymore. There’s a guy I feel bad for. Not so much wealthy propagandists with their own platforms and printers.

[_Ceeboo]

Hey CP!

Ceeboo, note the reason for Prager's lawsuit:

... demonetized ...

Prager isn't concerned so much with 'free speech' as he is 'free money'. Else why list it as the main complaint?

While I am huge fan of Prager (I adore him and his radio show. I am also part way through his book on Exodus - Being Jewish, I find his perspective to be fascinating) I don't know that much about the videos. I have watched about a dozen of them (I think there are a couple of hundred videos and counting - with over a billion views) but it is my understanding that PragerU is a non-profit organization.

Anyway, I am almost always (very close to 100%) in favor of free speech but I understand that this (Google/YouTube/Free Speech) is very complex. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

[Guest]

I have a friend on Facebook who was marketing his music there. He noticed that due to changes in their software few people were seeing his music promotions anymore. There’s a guy I feel bad for. Not so much wealthy propagandists with their own platforms and printers.

I think the biggest factor in how your content gets presented is how much you make the platform presenting it. Prager has his own, somewhat popular website, with the same content you can find on youtube, that, I assume, he is already making advertising money on. Why would youtube push his content higher in their search criteria than the guys who solely host on their youtube channels and are completely dependent on youtube for advertising dollars? This whole thing is about money and how to rank videos by profitability to the host. It seems like a stretch to cry discrimination on this one...

A few years ago we hired a handful of people to work on SEO and web ranking work for some our clients both in the US and internationally. Trying to guess and then cater to the algorithms is nothing but black magic and anyone that says otherwise is trying to sell you their web optimization service. The algorithms change constantly and react to all kinds of interactions, age and content. It changes from day to day, country to country and site to site. Its impossible to guess why something might be delisted or pushed down in any search engine.

[_Kishkumen]

I think the biggest factor in how your content gets presented is how much you make the platform presenting it. Prager has his own, somewhat popular website, with the same content you can find on youtube, that, I assume, he is already making advertising money on. Why would youtube push his content higher in their search criteria than the guys who solely host on their youtube channels and are completely dependent on youtube for advertising dollars? This whole thing is about money and how to rank videos by profitability to the host. It seems like a stretch to cry discrimination on this one...

I think the whole thing is fishy—perhaps a fake crisis, there sort of thing that gets the base riled up. Something along the lines of the NRA suddenly claiming they are cash strapped. This is all a warm up to the midterms. That base needs to be solid as a rock, and they will be motivated if they feel like liberals are stifling their “conservative” voices.

Alex Jones has been getting mileage out of this for days now. He knew he had flouted the rules, and doubtless the lawyers were tussling, and Jones knew he would lose. Now he’s making the best of a bad situation (which he caused) by playing the phony persecution card. Other right wing groups are following suit. We’re looking at a messaging strategy, not a real crisis.

Here is Jones over a week ago fanning the flames of the phony crisis:

https://www.real.video/5816361453001

[_canpakes]

Hey CP!

While I am huge fan of Prager (I adore him and his radio show. I am also part way through his book on Exodus - Being Jewish, I find his perspective to be fascinating) I don't know that much about the videos. I have watched about a dozen of them (I think there are a couple of hundred videos and counting - with over a billion views) but it is my understanding that PragerU is a non-profit organization.

Anyway, I am almost always (very close to 100%) in favor of free speech but I understand that this (Google/YouTube/Free Speech) is very complex. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

You're correct that PragerU is registered as a non-profit. Of course, this does not mean that the folks that run things are not earning a wage*. But the fact that demonetization is an issue speaks to the fact that the organization sees a threat to continued collection an disbursement of monies designed to push a particular agenda.

*Review their 2015 tax forms at the link: https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... 55cd-9.pdf

[_schreech]

I think the whole thing is fishy—perhaps a fake crisis, there sort of thing that gets the base riled up. Something along the lines of the NRA suddenly claiming they are cash strapped. This is all a warm up to the midterms. That base needs to be solid as a rock, and they will be motivated if they feel like liberals are stifling their “conservative” voices.

Alex Jones has been getting mileage out of this for days now. He knew he had flouted the rules, and doubtless the lawyers were tussling, and Jones knew he would lose. Now he’s making the best of a bad situation (which he caused) by playing the phony persecution card. Other right wing groups are following suit. We’re looking at a messaging strategy, not a real crisis.

Here is Jones over a week ago fanning the flames of the phony crisis:

https://www.real.video/5816361453001

Claiming the white christian male victim card got Trump elected and, hey, this isn't a very creative or intelligent group of people so go with what you know I guess. Impotent fury toward the Libruls!!, anger at 8 years of a colored president, constant rants about white victim-hood, christian pearl grasping and a loose grip on reality due to a constant diet of am radio and infotainment right wing "news" got them Trump so the sky is the limit if they can scare the "conservatives" into voting. Too bad its getting kind of transparent.

[_Kishkumen]

So, if you want a really solid reason to be suspicious of this Alex Jones shadow banning pseudo-crisis, look no further that James O’Keefe, the fake investigator and prankster, who “investigated” Twitter in 2017 to make it appear like the company was shadow banning conservatives.

See https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/01/activist-says-twitter-shadow-bans-conservatives-dont-believe-it/

Yes, that’s the same O’Keefe who presented a heavily doctored video about Planned Parenthood. Guy’s more crooked than a three dollar bill.

Crisis debunked.

[_Water Dog]

WTF are you talking about? Facebook is not the internet. There is only ONE comcast therefore, monopoly!. There are, literally, thousands of social media companies that cater to every kind of freak and fetish. You are just not very good at logic are you?

Are you physically incapable of talking without insulting? What is wrong with you? Flashing your inferiority complex at me with invectives doesn't make you right. Did I say Facebook was the internet? No, I didn't. You keep talking about comprehension skills while repeatedly, over and over, failing to comprehend what I'm actually saying. Facebook is no more the internet than cell phone providers are the radio spectrum. Facebook is an independent communication network. It is a monopoly, with zero competitors, and has virtually 100% global market saturation.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-antitr ... 1516121561

https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/22/1738 ... p-question

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-u ... 2018-04-11