All the World's Wrongs: Games At Fault!

[Asura]

But as QC also mentions, there is a YouTube problem here too. A video like this shouldn’t be getting so many views or comments but YouTube pushes these things up, not down into the the sewers where they belong.

Perhaps; but then the video searches are driven by an algorithm which is fuelled by popularity. Things snowball. This happens every day. The issue isn't so much YouTube but rather people. It's no different to people rubbernecking a bad car accident as they drive by the other side of the motorway.

I'm not sure what the solution is. Should YouTube allow this on their platform? It's a person committing an act of virtual violence; I don't know if I'm comfortable with YouTube arbitrating in such affairs.

That being said, it makes me think about my attitude to censorship in videogames. I've always found it a difficult thing to pin down. Growing up in the UK, and having lived through the likes of the Mortal Kombat furore and seen the Jack Thompson campaign from afar, I've rubbed shoulders with people with differing opinions. Many US gamers I've met have insisted that any form of censorship, even the prohibition of the sales of extremely violent or sexually implicit games to minors, is a form of censorship. I guess that's a weak form of libertarianism (they believe the market would make such things unsuccessful if they weren't supposed to exist). I have a hard time going with that perspective because I remember when I was 14, and I was very against censorship because I wanted my sexy violent videogames because I was 14.

So that means I prefer some form of censorship, at which point it comes down to where you draw the line.

[Neon Ignition]

I'm almost surprised RDR2 was out more than a week before scandal hit it given Rockstar games are a magnet for it. I imagine they'll either hold off giving any response or will brush it off as becomes a rabbit hole of ways the discussion could work against them that increasingly take the focus off the user who is promoting themselves via the vid or Youtube for what it's willing to promote and host itself.

[Dogg Thang]

Perhaps; but then the video searches are driven by an algorithm which is fuelled by popularity. Things snowball. This happens every day. The issue isn't so much YouTube but rather people. It's no different to people rubbernecking a bad car accident as they drive by the other side of the motorway.

Yeah, the problem is also YouTube because most broadcasters won’t base their show promotions based on people rubbernecking an accident. YouTube does and that’s why it’s a problem and that’s why the issue definitely very strongly includes YouTube right up there. When Microsoft’s twitter bot went racist, they had the good sense to pull it. YouTube would instead promote more racists. The responsibility is very clear.

[Asura]

Yeah, the problem is also YouTube because most broadcasters won’t base their show promotions based on people rubbernecking an accident. YouTube does and that’s why it’s a problem and that’s why the issue definitely very strongly includes YouTube right up there.

That's the issue though, right? I mean I believe that YouTube's best quality is that it's based on what people actually watch, rather than a bunch of suits in a room deciding "the fall schedule" based upon the viewing habits of a tiny group of Nielsen Families. That's why we get things that no suit would ever consider making; channels like Techmoan or [MENTION=1524]Yakumo[/MENTION]'s stuff.

What I'm saying is that I'm not sure how you keep that while censoring in an even-handed manner.

[Dogg Thang]

This is just basic society stuff here. If you launch a servic where people can come punch a homeless person, you’d get people taking you up on it and paying for their privilege. You would hope most would have the decency not to launch that service but you put in laws to prevent people doing it because you know someone will. YouTube is a sewer and yet now has attained the position of broadcaster in every sense of the word. It needs to behave as such or be regulated up to the neck until it does.

[Asura]

This is just basic society stuff here. If you launch a servic where people can come punch a homeless person, you’d get people taking you up on it and paying for their privilege. You would hope most would have the decency not to launch that service but you put in laws to prevent people doing it because you know someone will. YouTube is a sewer and yet now has attained the position of broadcaster in every sense of the word. It needs to behave as such or be regulated up to the neck until it does.

I suppose, due to the sheer mainstream nature of it.

On a related note, this relates to the whole "eternal september" thing. Sometimes I wish the internet was still the way it was ~2004. The internet felt like this open forum that was going to bring humanity together. Perhaps it was a naive delusion but it was a nice one to have.

[Dogg Thang]

Not just the mainstream nature. It attends all the markets like a broadcaster. It now commissions shows like a broadcaster. But most importantly it has taken broadcast audiences and boasts its does this. It needs to then assume the responsibility that comes with that, like every other broadcaster does.

But yeah, the internet is a very changed place.

[Lebowski]

They must have a team that's responsible for cracking down on misogynistic and racist content on youtube, how can something like the above get 1.5 million views and not be on YouTube's radar? Maybe it is but its not in there interest to crack down on content that's bringing in over a million advert views (even more now the papers have go hold of it). Ive not watched the vid but its more than likely an internet troll who's mission is to get people rilled up and is now probably laughing his arse off about his video getting loads of attention.

[Dogg Thang]

That’s it exactly. YouTube’s business is advertising, not content. The only times they ever seem to react to anything is when their advertisers start to pull out. In that way, they are effectively sociopathic and it’s already clear they won’t regulate themselves and so intervention is required.

[MartyG]

Yeah, the problem is also YouTube because most broadcasters won’t base their show promotions based on people rubbernecking an accident.

Really?

Pretty sure that's exactly what reality TV shows are and the base level audiences they draw.

As for this, one clown on the internet is not Rockstar's responsibility.

[Team Andromeda]

Really?

Pretty sure that's exactly what reality TV shows are and the base level audiences they draw.

As for this, one clown on the internet is not Rockstar's responsibility.

Well said.

[Dogg Thang]

Really?

Pretty sure that's exactly what reality TV shows are and the base level audiences they draw.

And so broadcasters are heavily regulated to keep the level of this in check. You can’t really compare the depths of broadcast TV to the depths of YouTube. They may both appeal to the lowest common denominator with some awful rubbish but YouTube’s baseline is way lower.

[MartyG]

There are less standards on YouTube for sure, but both types of media court the lowest common denominator**. As you point out, the only reason they don't plumb the same depths is purely down to tighter regulation. If it were not for that, they'd both need deep sea diving bells.

** Big Brother, Kinga and an empty bottle.

[Dogg Thang]

Yep, probably. Which is why broadcast standards have been implemented and changed over decades and now YouTube needs similar regulation.

Edit: flip side is Netflix enters and aims high. Amazon also have not aimed to be a toilet. So it’s wrong to say that all other broadcasters would do the same based on some rubbish on channel 4 or 5. Most broadcasters aim a LOT higher.

[QualityChimp]

If you launch a service where people can come punch a homeless person, you’d get people taking you up on it and paying for their privilege.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/2283114.stm