Anyone who still thinks Google is a U.S. company is sadly mistaken. Sure they have a campus in Mountain View but they have sub-entities all over the world and are loyal to no one.
Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, doubled down on YouTube’s censorship practices during a recent interview about the perception of conservative creator demonetization and bannings.
What they are doing is defining ‘hate speech’ to remove any comment, video, discussion, opinion, political view, that they do not like. This is nothing but leftist censorship under the guise of a stupid policy that they do not even enforce with a nod toward honesty
You know, I don’t know all the details of this specific video, but in general, look, I mean all of us, you know, none of us want harmful content on our platforms. I think last quarter alone we removed 9 million videos from the platform. More recently, we have introduced, you know just like today we do this in search. We, you know, we rank content based on quality. And so we are bringing that same notion and approach to YouTube, so that we can rank higher quality stuff better and really prevent borderline content.
Content which doesn’t exactly violate policies, which need to be removed, but which can still cause harm. And so we are working hard. It’s a hard computer science problem. It’s also a hard societal problem because we need better frameworks around what is hate speech, what’s not, and how do we as a company make those decisions at scale, and get it right without making mistakes.
Look we aren’t quite where we want to be. But I think it’s a genuinely hard problem of how do you, YouTube has the scale of the entire Internet. And I think we’re making a lot of progress, but the thing we are trying to do is to bring more authoritative sources and fact checks on videos, which may be controversial. It’s a case where we got it wrong, but that’s what we are trying to do and we are working hard to improve.
The big techs are going to get trust busted because they cannot claim to be open forums and so protected from libel laws and other limitations on publishing and then censor content. As soon as they censor anything, the protective cloak of the “open forum” should be rejected by the government and libel laws and all else should come into play against them.
They originally made their way as a platform, received legal protection as a platform so they could not be sued; but now are acting as a publisher by censoring legal speech with that legal protection in place still, which is wrong.
But that aside they are effective monopolies or an oligarchy with a stranglehold on social media, so they should be deemed open platforms, or sued into oblivion, or broken up. I prefer an open platform because others will take too long.
As for this interview, I am not happy about transgenders telling us what we should and should not think about their gender/sex, because we don’t allow anorexics to give us all nutritional advice, and I struggle to see the difference.
The DOJ needs to act.