This will continue until Vimeo or another competitor starts to dig into Google's ad revenue or Sec. 230 is repealed and YT, Twitter and others become liable for what people say on their platforms.
The other option is for Uncle Sam to say what we already know - Google/YT, Twitter and Facebook are an oligopoly and need to be reigned in or…
This will continue until Vimeo or another competitor starts to dig into Google's ad revenue or Sec. 230 is repealed and YT, Twitter and others become liable for what people say on their platforms.
The other option is for Uncle Sam to say what we already know - Google/YT, Twitter and Facebook are an oligopoly and need to be reigned in or broken apart using anti-trust laws.
The problem is that Nancy and Chuck and Mitch and Kevin are receiving donations to not do anything. So we all pay the price.
Maybe voters will wake up. LOL, I crack myself up.
You make good points but hypothetically, if Google was broken up and YouTube spun off as its own company (as it was before Google bought them), wouldn't they still be the only show in town? They would still have the final say on what's appropriate and what isn't.
I'm as guilty as the next guy as I love YouTube and visit the site at least a few times per week. Sometimes I've been legitimately upset if I couldn't find the exact clip I'm looking for. We're so entitled on the web it's absurd.
It would be healthier in a business sense if YouTube did not reign supreme but man, Vimeo must be light years behind in terms of viewership.
I see where YouTube is coming from in terms of not wanting to promote violence in turbulent times but they keep moving the goal posts. Like Matt said, if it's OK for CNN and MSNBC, why isn't it OK for small, independent journalists?
This will continue until Vimeo or another competitor starts to dig into Google's ad revenue or Sec. 230 is repealed and YT, Twitter and others become liable for what people say on their platforms.
The other option is for Uncle Sam to say what we already know - Google/YT, Twitter and Facebook are an oligopoly and need to be reigned in or broken apart using anti-trust laws.
The problem is that Nancy and Chuck and Mitch and Kevin are receiving donations to not do anything. So we all pay the price.
Maybe voters will wake up. LOL, I crack myself up.
Voting? Its 2021.
five billion likes for this comment
You make good points but hypothetically, if Google was broken up and YouTube spun off as its own company (as it was before Google bought them), wouldn't they still be the only show in town? They would still have the final say on what's appropriate and what isn't.
I'm as guilty as the next guy as I love YouTube and visit the site at least a few times per week. Sometimes I've been legitimately upset if I couldn't find the exact clip I'm looking for. We're so entitled on the web it's absurd.
It would be healthier in a business sense if YouTube did not reign supreme but man, Vimeo must be light years behind in terms of viewership.
I see where YouTube is coming from in terms of not wanting to promote violence in turbulent times but they keep moving the goal posts. Like Matt said, if it's OK for CNN and MSNBC, why isn't it OK for small, independent journalists?