If YouTube’s algorithms radicalize people, it’s hard to tell from the data(arstechnica.com)

23 pointsby m-watson5 lat temu12 comments

arstechnica.com

If YouTube’s algorithms radicalize people, it’s hard to tell from the data

https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/08/if-youtubes-algorithms-radicalize-people-its-hard-to-tell-from-the-data/

12 comments

anonymouswacker5 lat temu

cough cough manufacturing consent

m-watson5 lat temu

A pre-print version: https://arxiv.org/abs/2011.12843 and their open science page: https://osf.io/vs4d9/

PaulHoule5 lat temu

Baudrillard said that television has a "cooling" effect, that is it recasts citizens as consumers and dissuades political participation.

If it does that for 9999 out of 10,000 people, the 1 person who is motivated to (say) drive their car into a crowd at a protest will disappear in the statistics.

ctoth5 lat temu

Nasrudith5 lat temu

Yeah the tiresome hit pieces are why I seldom browse news websites directly. It is a clear case of a Big Lie in action.

r29vzg25 lat temu

Seems like YouTube is not alone in radicalizing people.

The question is what isn’t radicalizing people.

NYT and the old media is fighting YT and the new media for the rights to be the best radicalization tool.

Everyone is fighting for people’s attention. NYT and the old media is losing.

rvz5 lat temu

Exactly. Tons of evidence supporting the fact that YouTube and other social media sites ARE radicalising people and have done so in the past by hosting it as well. [0]

Not sure why it is so difficult to for Arstechnica to do basic research like you just did citing multiple articles from the same publisher source.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28035432

theandrewbailey5 lat temu

Can't tell if sarcasm. (Assuming yes?)

The New York Times has been targeting big tech for years, so of course they would write hit pieces on Youtube.

m-watson5 lat temu

There is absolutely evidence supporting the idea that YouTube and social media sites are contributing to the radicalization of people. This is not saying there is not evidence, it is reporting one one specific study that used a very specific method. It is worth reporting on specific studies/methods as well as doing over arching journalism on a topic. One piece does not discount another.

ctoth5 lat temu

I'd appreciate any links you have to this evidence. I also found this:

> After conducting a detailed analysis of recommendations received by each channel type, we refute the popular radicalization claims. To the contrary, these data suggest that YouTube’s recommendation algorithm actively discourages viewers from visiting radicalizing or extremist content. Instead, the algorithm is shown to favor mainstream media and cable news content over independent YouTube channels with slant towards left-leaning or politically neutral channels. Our study thus suggests that YouTube’s recommendation algorithm fails to promote inflammatory or radicalized content, as previously claimed by several outlets.

Here's a more accessible writeup[1].

[0]: View of Algorithmic extremism: Examining YouTube's rabbit hole of radicalization https://arxiv.org/abs/1912.11211

[1]: https://mark-ledwich.medium.com/youtube-radicalization-an-au...

m-watson5 lat temu

One source is: https://www.rand.org/randeurope/research/projects/internet-a...

Here is a shorter blog post that references the above research: https://www.rand.org/blog/2014/03/the-internets-role-in-radi...

Nasrudith5 lat temu

The BATF radicalized people too - Timothy McVeigh credits Waco for his attack (and well was also pretty close to begin with but still radicalizing). Are we to dissolve them then? The real question is the magnitude - without that the premise and logic are fundamentally deeply flawed.