The youtube recommendation algorithm brings up new and cool content over long period of time, and I cultivated my recommendation feed as such.
It's a destination in itself.
Sure, you could have a video site that just have a top ten video and a subscription list, but it wouldn't be as compelling.
Now. There are a lot of things that youtube could rightfully be criticized for, and perhaps there should be major changes made to how youtube works. Better pay for youtube creators and payment to small channels for example. More promotion of youtube premium, and less advertising.
I assume that youtube is profitable. The question is how much service that they can offer but still remain sustainable. If they're not profitable, how they could monetize it without destroying the value of the platform, ideally adding to the value rather than taking it away. I like some of the youtube scripted show, and I was disappointed that they canceled a show that I want to see continued.
> The youtube recommendation algorithm brings up new and cool content
For you.
For kids it brings up amputation videos and seriously weird/predatory shit. Should they be cultivating their recommendation feed better?
Try searching for '!' on the homepage. You'll get a mix of kid videos and fucked up animated softcore furry shit. It's been like that for fucking years.
For me it brings up Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson shite constantly, despite my refusal to engage in such content whatsoever. It just figures, hey you like watching video game content so you'll love these smarmy shitheads.
It's vastly inferior to TikTok's algorithm by all accounts, like it's not even close. And it's been horrendously gamed.
All they have is the network effect and Google's monopoly powers. Their algorithm sucks, their ads suck, their policies towards creators suck (as you said yourself). Everything they've ever brought in that was actually good was cribbed from porn sites.
I've had success with just blocking these channels, or selecting "don't recommend this to me", after a while it stops suggesting right wing content to me, it hasn't for quite a while in fact.
I've had mostly the same success, but it's disconcerting that I even have to block those guys to begin with.
Also, at this point the suggestion algorithm seems close to worthless. My Youtube suggestion feed is either channels that I already follow, or whose videos I've watched recently, or complete garbage. Any worthwhile new channels or videos, I've have to seek out for myself.
Well, it could always be worse - it could be Facebook's recommendation algorithm! I literally block right wing/extremist content on my feed every single day, my blocked list must be hundreds if not thousands of items long, and it just doesn't get a hint, there's more of that stuff every single day. I suspect that Facebook just doesn't care because according to their stats it drives engagement, even if it's negative user experience(because of course I can't stop myself commenting how fucking stupid someone posting flat earth content is, so someone at facebook goes "look he commented on that post, that means he likes it!").
> I suspect that Facebook just doesn't care because according to their stats it drives engagement
That's part of it, but I'm certain there's more to it.
I've seen too many people and pages get their reach cut 100 fold over the last 7 or so years. The content was very engaging, had lots of likes and comments, then boom, they all started going from 5 or 6 figure posts down to 2 and 3 figures. Marianne Williamson, for example, hit 10% support nationally - then her Facebook posts went from 6 figures to 3 in a day.
Take Gaza, and the global calls for a ceasefire. Despite huge engagement, and the strong support of the vast majority of every countries population (bar Israel itself), I've seen virtually nothing about it on Facebook. On LinkedIn I've seen 1 single post concerning it since October 7th, and it had 0 likes. That's not natural. No fucking way.
> For me it brings up Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson shite constantly, despite my refusal to engage in such content whatsoever. It just figures, hey you like watching video game content so you'll love these smarmy shitheads.
You can watch "adjacent" content—at least according to YouTube—and you'll be fed Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson.
Even if you wanted to see that content, maybe that's as far as you're willing to go, personally. Too bad! You get even more extreme commentators.
The youtube recommendation algorithm brings up new and cool content over long period of time, and I cultivated my recommendation feed as such.
It's a destination in itself.
Sure, you could have a video site that just have a top ten video and a subscription list, but it wouldn't be as compelling.
Now. There are a lot of things that youtube could rightfully be criticized for, and perhaps there should be major changes made to how youtube works. Better pay for youtube creators and payment to small channels for example. More promotion of youtube premium, and less advertising.
I assume that youtube is profitable. The question is how much service that they can offer but still remain sustainable. If they're not profitable, how they could monetize it without destroying the value of the platform, ideally adding to the value rather than taking it away. I like some of the youtube scripted show, and I was disappointed that they canceled a show that I want to see continued.