That site looks hilarious and according to my web filter, possible dangerous. Anyway, I'm pretty sure it's a parody site like the Onion. I'm not going to click on any of it's links though.
This appears to be a real opinion piece from The Guardian: Why Ivanka Trump's new haircut should make us very afraid Arwa Mahdawi https://www.theguardian.com/comment...trumps-new-haircut-should-make-us-very-afraid "If her family cares about anything, it is image. Her political bob (pob) may be an attempt to get us to take her ambitions more seriously." "The Daily Beast, for example, mused that it “could be an optics ploy to communicate control in a derailed administration.” Salon asked whether the shorter cut was a 'nod to her growing ambitions,' while an image consultant told Refinery29 that Trump “wants to re-establish credibility because her father’s campaign is coming up..." The Onion and Babylon Bee have their work cut out for them if they want to parody this.
In another brilliant maneuver in censorship, YouTube has erased and disabled the comments for all the videos of this disability advocacy couple who do interviews on their channel of disabled children and adults with misunderstood and often rare diseases to try to raise awareness and encourage discussions about various disabilities. YouTube's rationale is that they would be high risk for harassment and predatory behavior. They are "protecting" the children by not allowing them to interact with anyone, the main point of the channel. It's not like disabled children with life threatening disfiguring and debilitating diseases tend to already be ignored by society at large. A mother of one the kids they interviewed who is now deceased apparently used to enjoy coming back to re-watch their video and read the comments about the child she has since lost. Gone. I feel safer already.
Youtube is notorious for their censorship making absolutely no sense. I think a lot of it is automated and they don't even have a human making the decision in a lot of cases. I'm not advocating for censorship or saying they should censor anything as I'm not a fan of censorship, but it is very strange what they censor. Any time I look at anything even vaguely historical or political I will get linked to a bunch of alt-right channels, many of which espouse some pretty bigoted views. Some of them are unapologetic white supremacists. And yet it doesn't seem like Youtube has any interest in censoring those, even though their own policies state that hateful content is against the rules. They had a problem with some "comedy" channels that were basically people psychologically abusing children. But they had to be dragged kicking and screaming into banning those, even though "child endangerment" is against their rules. They also had to be dragged kicking and screaming into banning Alex Jones even though he was encouraging his followers to harass the families of Sandy Hook victims and spreading inflammatory conspiracy theories, but supposedly harassment and threats are against the rules. They are very bad at enforcing the rules they laid out, and then they do stuff like what you posted. Whatever happened to "don't be evil" which was supposed to be the founding principle of google? https://www.youtube.com/about/policies/#community-guidelines
Censoring the Internet is nearly impossible. Youtube isn't being an ass. They don't want to sued and they don't want to spend a lot of money. The result is automated blanket censorship. How do you effectively moderate a platform that the entire world can use? It's not easy.
Yeah but whatever algorithms they're using don't even remotely work correctly, and it seems like whatever humans they have reviewing things are assholes or lazy or both. If they are so worried about lawsuits why did it take them so long to ban Alex Jones? Dude was a walking, talking lawsuit waiting to happen.
True. Would you believe that content moderating is now outsourced to other countries? I heard about it on an NPR segment. Apparently people want more than minimum wage to look at hate, death, and child molestation videos all day. So these companies are now outsourcing the work to the same foreign call centers we all hate. They pay the employees a little more to do that kind of work because the turn over is high. Many employees are traumatized and quit after a short time. It kind of reminds me of those documentaries about the people/kids in Africa breathing the smoke from our burning discarded electronics. This is like the digital version of that. One makes the body sick, the other the mind.
I can sympathize that mistakes can happen with algorithms trying to wade through millions upon millions of subscribers and videos. This is where the human element should have came in. They appealed this decision. YouTube REJECTED their appeal while big corporate entities covering arguably more controversial and considerably less valuable content are completely free of censorship. They are being jackasses when it gets to the point that they've appealed this clearly terrible decision and YouTube still censors them. I've watched some of these videos, and this guy is a teacher who comes across as a massive bleeding heart nice guy and sincere disability advocate. I can respect genuine efforts to reduce predatory behavior towards children, but this couple is not doing anything causing that. They have had a very low level of toxicity despite having so many subscribers (1.86 million currently). He has been featured on several television stations, yet none of these stations ever have to deal with this type of censorship. ABC News does a story about him that is up on YouTube with a comment section that is not censored. But go to this guy's actual channel and every single one of hundreds of videos has comment sections disabled.
I don't buy that protecting the children nonsense. They've had channels like FamilyOFive that were devoted to basically showing child abuse. And they did nothing about them for years. And I'm guessing that was because that channel had a large following and was probably generating a lot of ad revenue. I kind of suspect youtube treats channels differently depending on the ad revenue. The bigger channels seem to be able to get away with things that smaller channels can't. Take Logan Paul posing with Japanese suicide victims. A smaller channel would have gotten banned. He just got demonetized for a few days. And that's probably because every one of his videos gets millions of views. Like I said, whatever happend to "don't be evil"?
Another example of Youtube being assholes, this brilliant channel on WW1 and the Russian Revolution just got demonetized: They produced a lot of really well researched content with many rare photos and videos. It was one of the better historical channels on Youtube. Did a really good job of breaking down a very complex conflict and making it something people could understand. I'm kind of thinking this was because they were starting to produce some WW2 content, and probably mentioned Hitler, which set off the youtube censor bots.
Couple of thoughts. The “don’t be evil” was quietly amended in the bylaws a long time ago. Even before Alphabet Inc, I think. YouTube definitely treats channels different depending on size and private agreements. Other corporate channels get almost 100% free reign even though they barely get the views of to YT creators. But tier 1 creators have it much better than the rest of YouTube. Basically if your not big enough to have a real YT rep assigned to you. Your channel problems are dealt with via email to India. Most importantly. YouTube doesn’t make money. It’s a black hole of expenses. It’s so bad that Alphabet is fighting the SEC in court to NOT disclose how much money YouTube loses for shareholders. They will probably lose but want to buy a few years time. But they WILL have to become profitable or kill the projects. So things will get worse. Censorship doesn’t exist on YouTube. It’s their platform and they can do whatever the fuck they want. Anyone is free to compete. But nobody does. Why? Because everyone knows it’s a black hole of billions of dollars.
Got to put the family cat down in a few hours. I've never been a big fan of cats and this one was a pain in the ass but it sucks putting any animal down. It's been sick and after $600 we still don't know what is wrong with it. It might be cancer but it would take another $900 to find out. Then about 3 days ago it went blind and maybe partially deaf.
It really sucks putting an animal down. Cats can go either way. I've had cats that were assholes, but I've also had other cats that were friendly and loyal more like dogs.