YouTube has announced new policies aimed at “limiting the reach of borderline content” and to “protect people from problematic content that doesn’t violate our community guidelines.” Got that? They’re figuring out how to “protect” people from content that does not violate their guidelines.
The recent announcements come in the context of reporting on the 2020 election. One of YouTube’s principal tools is their choice of “recommended videos,” about which they boast “the top 10 authoritative news channels were recommended over 14X more than the top 10 non-authoritative channels on election-related content.”
As for these “authoritative channels, YouTube has chosen CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, and Fox. Because those news sources do serious investigative reporting, leave nothing out, and are entirely objective.
YouTube has already been doing a very good job at limiting the reach of “problematic” content, but they’re determined to crush dissenting content completely. Quoting from YouTube Insider, “while problematic misinformation represents a fraction of 1% of what’s watched on YouTube in the U.S., we know we can bring that number down even more.”
And to “bring down that number even more,” as of December 9, YouTube “will start removing any piece of content uploaded today (or anytime after) that misleads people by alleging that widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome of the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, in line with our approach towards historical U.S. Presidential election.”
But hold on. Widespread fraud or errors very likely did change the outcome of the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. Why not allow an open debate and presentation of the facts?
To get two very different interpretations of what YouTube has done, listen to Jeremy Hambly, on BitChute, and read Taylor Hatmaker, on TechCrunch. Hambly is understandably upset that YouTube has already deleted more than 8,000 channels that had spread “misleading” information about the election between September and mid-December 2020, yet is turning their canceling action up a notch. Hatmaker, on the other hand, and like so many millions in the United States, does not recognize fascism even now that it’s in the open and poised to seize absolute power. Hatmaker thinks YouTube is doing too little, too late.
Hambly, with over 1.0 million subscribers on YouTube, is hedging his bets. His videos are now disbursed across multiple platforms including BitChute, Rumble, and Odysee. And every time YouTube silences another voice, these alternative platforms gain viewers. But with YouTube still commanding 90 percent of the U.S. digital video market, what they decide people can and cannot see has a decisive impact on how millions of Americans form opinions and vote.
An ongoing public debate over the impact of fraud on the outcome of the 2020 election would be healthy. But to the extent that debate occurs, it will be done on alterative media. And whether or not fraud actually did change the outcome of the 2020 election, swing voters were already decisively manipulated by the actions of YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Google search, and every one of the “authoritative news channels.”
* * *