![]() But what’s to be done about politicians complaining when their content is judged to be bad? What’s the dividing line between free speech and a naked pack of lies? That last point brings us back to the unanswered question in the whole social media content debate - what actually constitutes bad content? There are clearly some topics that an overwhelming majority can agree are beyond the pale, such as child abuse. So what happens is the machines will flag it and then it will be sent to human reviewers who will determine whether or not this is in fact violative or not. ![]() We've been able to really fine tune our machine so that we can find a lot of this content and it is flagged, but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's removed. The machines are good, we can find content across the board, but something like hate speech, or something that has a lot of context, would be something that would be harder from a machine standpoint to be able to detect. The sharp reduction since 2017 she attributes to policy improvements, but also to a lot of hard work that’s gone into the machine learning systems behind the scenes: We were also able to show that we were able to reduce it significantly over time. We were able to show that we have a very high ability to find this content and show exactly what that number was. We have been asked many times by governments, by press, by advertising, by the creator community, about this violative rate and we were able to show exactly how good we are at enforcement of our policies. That’s an important milestone, she feels: That VVR now stands at a rate of 16 views out of every 10,000 violate YouTube policies, according to CEO Susan Wojcicki, speaking at the World Economic Forum Global Technology Governance Summit this week. That’s a new stat coming out of the firm’s quarterly transparency report and one that the company clearly hopes will fend of criticism about lack of vigilance around abuse of the platform by bad actors. The PR Nightmare has to be fixed, make YouTube and Google go into the right direction by having common sense rules like No Tolerance Policy on YouTube Trolls, False Flagging, and censoring music just like Internet Vigilantes like UMG_MK trying to do a witch hunt on removing YouTube videos of songs by The Beatles.The "violative view rate" (VVR) at YouTube has dropped over 70% since the end of 2017. The controversial Ad-Friendly Policy at YouTube is one of the few reasons YouTube went downhill and turn for the worse and into the wrong direction. We also want that policy abolished or changed for the better. The current Ad-Friendly Monetization Policy is still unfair to YouTubers. Under her leadership things started to went downhill and caused the reputation of YouTube and Google from the copyright controversy to the 2016 controversial YouTube PR Nightmare known as The Ad-Friendly Monetization Policy which was severely criticized by various YouTubers that the new rules censors and silenced YouTubers' freedom of speech and their platforms by demonetizing YouTube videos that deals with controversial subjects (like tragedies, natural disasters, politics, health, and etc.) and YouTubers loved Freedom Of Speech, but the new Ad-Friendly Monetization rules are still a dire form of Censorship by TPTB at Google and YouTube. Since February 2014, Susan Wojcicki became Chief Executive Officer ( CEO) of YouTube, which is part of Google.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |