ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Sunday, March 18, 2018

Big Social Reeducation

YouTube and Google are teaming up with Wikipedia to dynamically brainwash YouTube video viewers with unrequested textual reeducation sessions.
SW: This has been a year of fake news and misinformation and we have seen the importance of delivering information to our users accurately. There was a lot of stuff happening in the world a year ago. And we said, look, people are coming to our homepage and if we are just showing them videos of gaming or music and something really significant happened in the world, and we are not showing it to them, then in many ways we’re missing this opportunity. We had this discussion internally where people said, you know, ”What do those metrics look like, and are people going to watch that?” We came to the conclusion that it didn’t really matter. What mattered was that we had a responsibility to tell people what was happening in the world. So a year ago, we launched a few things. One of them was this top news shelf. So if you go to search, the information that we show at the top is from authoritative sources, and we limit that to authoritative sources. We also have that you, for example, can be in your home feed with news, looking at gaming, music, other information, something major happens in the world or in your region, and we decide that we’re going to show it to you.

NT: What is authoritative?

SW: Being part of Google, we work with Google News. Google News has a program where different providers can apply to be part of Google News, and then we use a different set of algorithms to determine who within that we consider authoritative. And then based on that we use those news providers in our breaking news shelf, and in our home feed.

NT: And what goes into those algorithms? What are some of the factors you consider when deciding whether something is authoritative or not?

SW: We don’t release what those different factors are. But there could be lots of different things that go into it. These are usually complicated algorithms. You could look at like the number of awards that they have won, like journalistic awards. You can look at the amount of traffic that they have. You could look at the number of people committed to journalistic writing. So, I’m just giving out a few there, but we look at a number of those, and then from that determine—and it’s a pretty broad set. Our goal is to make that fair and accurate.

NT: It’s super complicated because we don’t want to over-bias with established places and make it harder for a new place to come up. Facebook has started evaluating places based on how trustworthy they are and giving out surveys. And one of the obvious problems if you give a survey out and you ask, “Is that trustworthy?” and they’ve never heard of it, they won’t say yes. And that makes it harder for a startup journalistic entity. YouTube is, of course, the place where people start, so that’s tricky.

SW: It is tricky. There are many factors to consider. But the other thing we want to consider here is if there’s something happening in the world, and there is an important news event, we want to be delivering the right set of information. And so, we felt that there was responsibility for us to do that and for us to do that well. We released that a year ago. But I think what we’ve seen is that it’s not really enough. There’s continues to be a lot of misinformation out there.

NT: So I’ve heard.

SW: Yes, so you’ve heard. And the reality is, we’re not a news organization. We’re not there to say, “Oh, let’s fact check this.” We don’t have people on staff who can say, “Is the house blue? Is the house green?” So really the best way for us to do that is for us to be able to look at the publishers, figure out the authoritativeness or reputation of that publisher. And so that’s why we’ve started using that more. So one of the things that we want to announce today that’s new that will be coming in the next couple of weeks is that when there are videos around something that’s a conspiracy—and we’re using a list of well-known internet conspiracies from Wikipedia—that we will show as a companion unit next to the video information from Wikipedia for this event.

NT: YouTube will be sending people to text?

SW: We will be providing a companion unit of text, yes. There are many benefits of text. As much as we love video, we also want to make sure that video and text can work together.

NT: I love them both too.

SW: Yes, you must love text—as a writer. So here’s a video. Let’s see… “Five most believed Apollo landing conspiracies.” There is clear information on the internet about Apollo landings. We can actually surface this as a companion unit, people can still watch the videos, but then they have access to additional information, they can click off and go and see that. The idea here is that when there is something that we have listed as a popular conspiracy theory, the ability for us to show this companion unit.

NT: So the way you’ll identify that something is a popular conspiracy theory is by looking at Wikipedia’s list of popular conspiracy theories? Or you have an in-house conspiracy theory team that evaluates…and how does someone in the audience apply to be on that team? Because that sounds amazing.

SW: We’re just going to be releasing this for the first time in a couple weeks, and our goal is to start with the list of internet conspiracies listed where there is a lot of active discussion on YouTube. But what I like about this unit is it’s actually pretty extensible, for you to be able to watch a video where there’s a question about information and show alternative sources for you as a user to be able to look at and to be able to research other areas as well.
Translation: when you watch a Voxiversity video on YouTube, Google News is going to pop up infoboxes from Wikipedia that will totally disprove the dangerous badthought to which you are foolishly subjecting yourself.

Which gives me an idea....

Anyhow, as usual, the main challenge is that most conservatives would rather whine and cry about how the mean, unfair Left is being mean and unfair again rather than actually do anything about it. Here is yet another article decrying Wikipedia without mentioning the fact that Infogalactic already exists. Fortunately, someone in the comments rectified that failure; good work, Squidz Mackenzie. Keep in mind that if just one percent of the people who have publicly complained about Wikipedia bias simply joined the Burn Unit and edited Infogalactic three times per month, we'd already be threatening Wikipedia's information supremacy.

Now, it will happen eventually. We are making constant progress and are gradually chipping away at it. But that progress is happening much more slowly than it could if conservatives would stop wasting so much time trying to improve the enemy.

Labels: ,

38 Comments:

Blogger Matt March 18, 2018 10:11 AM  

Talk about a double-down. They're like Gammas who got away with touching a pretty girl's shoulder, and jump right into a breast grab. No tact. No easing it in. They want to fail.

Blogger Cedric March 18, 2018 10:12 AM  

If one were to have their own infoboxes pop up and show the Infogalactic page as well for them to then see that version, that would be quite devious. I can already imagine something mentioned about cultural Marxism and a responding infobox pointing out that the whole page on Wikipedia has been deleted and moved to a "conspiracy theory."

Blogger Lovekraft March 18, 2018 10:13 AM  

I still to this day do not understand why youtube cannot install an 18+ only channel/video section. This would be a free for all area (with limitations re specific threats/incitement) and voluntary.

Google/youtube can still appeal to the families, while also remaining relevant to free thinkers.

Blogger SemiSpook37 March 18, 2018 10:19 AM  

@3

But that would require people to actually work, and we can’t have that.

Blogger Miguel March 18, 2018 10:22 AM  

Which gives me an idea....


LOL Of course it does!

Blogger SmockMan March 18, 2018 10:24 AM  

Bet you cant disable this "feature". And dont you ever call it spam!

Blogger Mr.MantraMan March 18, 2018 10:25 AM  

Probably work as well as Microsoft's AIbot, give it a week it will be spouting "GTKRWN."

Blogger OGRE March 18, 2018 10:26 AM  

And the reality is, we’re not a news organization.

If they do what they are planning to according to whats layed out here, then they become a news organization. What they are intending to do is no different than what the AP, Reuters, or UPI does.

Its as if they want to act like a news agency in every way, including making editorial decisions, except in name.

Blogger Man of the Atom March 18, 2018 10:57 AM  

"And the reality is, we’re not a news organization."

No, they aren't. In reality, they are a propaganda organization.

Blogger Looking Glass March 18, 2018 11:02 AM  

@3 Lovekraft

You don't realize how stupid the management of YouTube is. If you think, "they can't be that stupid", realize there's at least another two layers below that. It's not some devious, evil scheme that you have to sort out. Just pick the most obvious answer built around incompetence & Progressivism, in everything but technical skill, and that's going to be the answer 90% of the time.


As for the topic at hand. Really, they're going to use Wikipedia? /pol/ is going to ruin these people and it'll be glorious.

Blogger Jeff aka Orville March 18, 2018 11:09 AM  

I recently watched "1984" again for the first time in years. In the lunchroom scene where Smith and his mates are discussing the upcoming 10th Edition Newspeak dictionary, one man says, “Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it.”

This is what Youtube, Google and Wikipedia aim to accomplish.

Blogger Daniel Paul Grech Pereira March 18, 2018 11:12 AM  

Been using infogalactic exclusiively.

Blogger RusticFederalist March 18, 2018 11:21 AM  

Anecdotally, DuckDuckGo returned an Infogalactic article in the first page results of a search request I made recently, even though I had not included Infogalactic in the query field.

Blogger Crew March 18, 2018 11:51 AM  

Meanwhile, (((Kurt))) Eichenwald has coined a new term, Christofascists, it seems and I am sure that Twitter and Google will not censure him:

https://twitter.com/kurteichenwald/status/975155945071349761

Blogger Looking Glass March 18, 2018 12:00 PM  

@14 Crew

Not new. That's from the early 2000s. Post-9/11 came "Islamofascism", which is actually an accurate term, and so a bunch of Leftists started using "Christofascism". Though I haven't seen that in at least a decade. Obama's election as, nominally, a Christian sent the Left into going along racial lines.

OpenID markstoval March 18, 2018 12:00 PM  

"Keep in mind that if just one percent of the people who have publicly complained about Wikipedia bias simply joined the Burn Unit and edited Infogalactic three times per month, we'd already be threatening Wikipedia's information supremacy."

I have Easter break coming up and I will endeavor to help with editing Infogalactic. I will then continue to do so as long as I can. This is a "social service project" that I can get behind. :-)

Now, a little help please. Anyone have a link to a "how to" or "newbie's need to know this"???

Blogger swiftfoxmark2 March 18, 2018 12:23 PM  

Didn't Stephen Colbert coin the term "wikiality" or something to that effect?

The dumb SJWs weren't supposed to take it seriously.

Blogger DonReynolds March 18, 2018 12:31 PM  

Nothing like getting a nose bleed on Sunday morning.

This interview is wrong on so many levels, it is difficult to know where to chew first.

YouTube is not a news organization ....but, they feel they have a RESPONSIBILITY to correct people when they drift off the agenda (or the reservation), but they do not have a RESPONSIBILITY to be correct or factual when they correct people. So the solution is for Google/YouTube/News to simply decide who is AUTHORITATIVE and let them provide the correction, but there is no need to be TRANSPARENT regarding the selection of the High Priests to provide the automatically authoritative views. They can pick their favorite magazine personality (like Paul Krudman), their favorite professor at Penn State, and their favorite Leftist organizations like Planned Parenthood, ACLU, and LaRaza when it comes to their worldview. How could that be biased or partisan?....I mean, really....they are using AUTHORITATIVE horseshit.

It will be no time at all before they start sending out the popups on everyone's computer screen....."Obey", "Don't THINK", "Work Hard", "Spend Money", "Vote Democrat", "KILL those who question AUTHORITY", "Property is Theft", "The Wealthy Stole what is YOURS", "WHITE is a Sin and Evil".

OpenID nhinsnow March 18, 2018 12:38 PM  

VD,

How does one join the burn unit? I didn't see any obvious link on mobile.

I'd like to help if possible.

Blogger Dave March 18, 2018 12:40 PM  

Spreading the news; way to go Squidz Mackenzie. I guess I have to hand it to you even if you are Canadian.

Blogger Dave March 18, 2018 12:48 PM  

nhinsnow wrote:How does one join the burn unit? I didn't see any obvious link on mobile.

Go here and choose the monthly subscription option to become a Burn Unit member:

http://infogalactic.com/info/Infogalactic:Donations

Then you too will be eligible to buy the cool Burn Unit T-shirts.

Blogger Matiss Zarkevics March 18, 2018 12:48 PM  

This will end the same way the FB experiment ended - with people trusting the information in the video even more, just because YT flagged it as non-trustworthy and appended their own little piece.

Blogger Wynn Lloyd March 18, 2018 1:03 PM  

Ugh. It's actually a term I might call myself, just to bait them, but Eichenwald and his cuck followers are the worst.

Blogger Aeoli March 18, 2018 1:04 PM  

Incredible.

Blogger manfred arcane March 18, 2018 1:36 PM  

@14
Some questions from this ignorant non-Murrican: you do have a large a number of religious Blacks and Latinos, right? And, there is a higher percentage of practicing Christians there than there is among the Whites?
So, how is it that there is no pushback from them regarding the Left's constant generalizations and attacks on Christians?

Because, I do remember seeing them react. When Joyce Carol Oates equated Christianity with white nationalism (something that was mentioned on this blog), there was a number of extremely negative responses from her Black twitter followers.
So, why aren't we seeing more of that?

Blogger Aeoli March 18, 2018 1:46 PM  

So, how is it that there is no pushback from them regarding the Left's constant generalizations and attacks on Christians?

Excellent question.

OpenID markstoval March 18, 2018 1:47 PM  

"Wired" Interviews YouTube Censor-In-Chief, Censors Itself

But, of course, Wired didn’t ask Ms. Wojcicki about her central role in getting James Damore fired. Why not? Well, would you want to get the head censor of the video monopoly mad at you if you put videos on Youtube?

by Steve Sailer
----

The tech giants have more censoring power today than the Soviet Union did back in the day. They must be taken down.

Blogger D. Bay March 18, 2018 1:52 PM  

Vox, off topic, but are you ever bringing back Alpha Game? Do you need more volunteer bloggers to keep it going?

Blogger VD March 18, 2018 2:31 PM  

Vox, off topic, but are you ever bringing back Alpha Game? Do you need more volunteer bloggers to keep it going?

Probably not. No, volunteer bloggers literally never work out. I've yet to meet anyone who can even manage two weeks of a single post per day.

Blogger RobertT March 18, 2018 2:54 PM  

Sergey Brin's X

Blogger RobertT March 18, 2018 2:58 PM  

The manosphere seems to have run it's course as it melts into the mainstream. Not so cutting edge any more. The smarter bloggers began covering other topics some time ago.

Blogger Crew March 18, 2018 3:02 PM  

Anyone wanting instructions on editing pages on Infogalactic can check here https://infogalactic.com/info/Infogalactic:Editors%27_guidelines

or here for a cheatsheet: https://infogalactic.com/info/Help:Cheatsheet

Let us know what can be improved.

Blogger Crew March 18, 2018 3:03 PM  

If anyone has hints on how to get Infogalactic pages/articles into the various search engines I really want to hear from you. Crew@you-know-where.

Blogger Cataline Sergius March 18, 2018 3:05 PM  

My recent studies of the Amazon A9 AI have me rethinking some assumptions about how to deal with Google.

I'd favored abstinence in the form of Duckduckgo and few other things but now I'm wondering if I was wrong.

They are extremely dependent on Google's AI (whatever the hell that's called in private). And AI can be thrown off the scent very, very easily.

Remember, in order to betray...you must first belong.

OpenID markstoval March 18, 2018 4:35 PM  

@ 32. Crew

Well those two pages took some reading! :-)

But the signup page was even longer.

Thanks for the info.

~ Mark

Blogger Thucydides March 18, 2018 5:39 PM  

From a comment on Instapundit, for people looking for more alternatives:

Google alternatives

We are not powerless against tech oligarchs. Vote like your way of life depends on it and make sure legislators are afraid of a primary challenger if they vote wrong. Take the time to call your representative and express your opinion when immigration "reform" bills head in the wrong direction. Complain to your city council member when zoning changes to increase apartment construction get proposed.
We are not powerless against Google. First, add a browser that's not Google Chrome. http://download.cnet.com/br... Second, block javascript web advertising. Google is primarily an advertising company. I'm used to Adblock Plus, but there are several other similar products. https://adblockplus.org/ Third, change your default search engine to something other than Google. I like DuckDuckGo. https://duckduckgo.com/ Fourth, move away from Gmail. Fifth, move away from the Google Android operating system. Used Apple iPhones with a worn out battery or something broken are plentiful and inexpensive. The repairs aren't that difficult with the right tools and replacement parts are easy to get. Buy a used iPhone from a friend or get a refurbished one. Ask the friend to contact the cellular carrier to get the phone unlocked so you can put it on an inexpensive data plan. https://buy.gazelle.com/buy...
You can also convert a Chromebook into a Linux laptop that doesn't communicate with Google. https://lifehacker.com/how-... There are also ways to replace Android on phones, but I'm not so sure the phone still works as a phone afterward. https://f-droid.org/

Blogger SciVo March 19, 2018 3:30 AM  

Crew wrote:If anyone has hints on how to get Infogalactic pages/articles into the various search engines I really want to hear from you. Crew@you-know-where.

Well this is "one weird trick" that everyone can and should use: search engines like incoming links. (AFAIK that's the real point of linkspam, not to get you to click.)

So I do a kind of "fieldstone wall" (one rock at a time) of SEO by taking advantage of organic opportunities to link good articles that I like and are relevant, trying to keep in mind that the link text can also be taken into account.

So I make a point of linking Infogalactic articles when I make obscure references in comments across the Web. And I don't actually know if that helps, but it can't hurt.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash March 19, 2018 1:50 PM  

SciVo wrote:So I make a point of linking Infogalactic articles when I make obscure references in comments across the Web. And I don't actually know if that helps, but it can't hurt.
It does help. I have some insight into how Google ranks search results, my son used to work for their QA contractor.
The primary thing is to get lots of links from popular content providers who don't sell links. Secondary is popular content providers who do sell some links. Third is social media mentions.
After that come blog commenters and other social media.

Finally, and most importantly for the present discussion, one of the QA criteria is to have a wikipedia article come up on the first page, if there is a relevant one. This is policy at Google.

If IG actually starts challenging wiki in ranking and mentions, expect there to be an effective policy to downgrade IG from the first page.

Google are horribly dishonest.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts