I just love how it took years to uncover the absolute nightmare going on with YouTube - that we’re actively shoveling angry, lonely, vulnerable young men to alt-right nut jobs - and then REPEATED THE EXACT MISTAKE with TikTok.
The clowns running social media sites will literally enable the 4th reich before they make their apps even slightly less profitable (but infinitely safer)
Quite a few reports found (for instance, one by Tech Transparency Project) that social platforms place ads alongside hate speech content, search query results for extremist groups, etc. And since that stuff tends to get a lot of engagement, regardless of whether it's positive or negative, it likely generates a sizeable chunk of ad revenue.
Misogyny funds capitalism in America. And yet misogyny keeps America from creating/benefitting from social policies that promote economic growth. I think my head's gonna explode.
I watch mostly feminist content on YouTube, a little bit of true crime, some local news clips when something is going on, and cat/cute animal videos.
Every few days the algorithm will shove a bunch of misogynistic dude bro podcasts in my feed. It’s really strange it will come in a wave, then I won’t see it for a few days, then I get another wave.
If I see them on my phone I can click something that says do not show in my feed, or I don’t wish to see this, without even opening it. On my TV I would have to open the video to down vote or whatever, so I don’t. Maybe if I took the time to do that it would stop but I don’t even want to click on that nonsense.
Should I take the time to click on the nonsense or is that what YouTube wants and that’s why I get the nonsense?
if you use a VPN, and change your location to a poorer country, you can normally get a better deal.
for example, if you claim you’re from Nigeria, then you can get youtube premium for significantly less - instead of $15 it goes to something like $5 or so
Who invented the algorithms? For the most part, it was men. Who own companies that have notoriously sexist practices and PR. So obviously they're not interested in giving women and non-white men much of a fair shake.
I remember reading about the algorithm for the post news site, owned by a wealthy white dude. It was not cool, basically they would shadow ban you if enough people muted you. I suppose that works if you like having your social media site full of political cults, so maybe that’s the goal there.
I like Mastodon. If I don’t like the way a server is run I can choose another. And there’s no algorithm.
A while back I was looking for some workout videos on YouTube. I don’t think I clicked enough to get into the truly misogynistic rabbit whole but it was definitely suggesting videos that were only a few degrees away. All I wanted were some lower back stretches!
Why is it considered misogynistic not to agree with feminism? Many people believe in some feminist ideas, but don’t embrace them all. Why must feminism never be questioned or opposed? Some feminist ideas are good, but not all. I don’t want my decisions about ideology taken away, and I am a woman who has a right to think whatever I want to think.
Where exactly in this post I implied it's misogynistic not to agree with feminism? Are you even familiar with the kind of messaging that the likes of Andrew Tate are pushing on young men and boys? It's not a well-balanced and insightful critique of feminism. It's a call for men to treat women like their property.
Feminism is questioned all the time - by feminists. There is no one feminism. If you believe women should not be treated as lesser than men, you are a feminist. How that can be achieved - that's something nobody has a definitive answer for and of ongoing debate.
You've written about this so well and it's truly crazy how many people don't realise the gravity of the power of recommender systems.
I'm currently writing my master's thesis on this topic and thought it might also be up your alley to check out this similar study conducted in Ireland that looks particularly at the links between stereotypically masculine, 'manosphere,' and then alt-right content being recommended to teen boys through algorithms on TikTok and Youtube. It's called "Recommending Toxicity: The role of algorithmic recommender functions on YouTube Shorts and TikTok in promoting male supremacist influencers" by the DCU anti-bullying centre and is absolutely worth the read.
I came across your essay because of maalvika and your note about her being a plagiarist. That sucks and I know all about how it feels having had my work plagiarised by none other than Graham Hancock, so I feel for you on that score.
That said, regarding this specific essay, you go on a lot about misogyny, but it’s not something you ever properly define or give examples of. And you simply assert that the radicalisation of young men includes thinking feminism has been a net negative. The implication we are supposed to have being that feminism has been a net good. But there is zero evidence that feminism has been good in general, and in fact plenty of evidence of its tragically toxic outcomes. In other words, you don’t make any argument. You present it as a fait accompli we are supposed to accept on faith. So, no. Your premise is completely wrong. I suggest you read up on the original promoters of feminism and the roots of that foul ideology of death.
You maybe want to pick up the book written by Rachel Wilson on it.
There is a lot of commentary on social media platforms, including this one, about "the algorithm," by which is meant sets of data processing rules that are applied to data and metadata managed on the platform. But it is not just about the methods by which these platforms provide recommendations or return search results. The key issue is that profile metadata that is collected in various ways. One, as you say, is through a user's behaviour in a particular context, where details of choices made inform and shape a user's profile in that context. But profiles are not built just by the data processing rules of a given platform.
Registering for a service typically gives away key information--Name, age, location, etc. If you pay for a service your card information provides a key for linking you to purchasing information in general. Thereafter profiles continue to be built by aggregating data from various sources--behaviour on the platform (completion of interest profiles; searches effected; "likes," "follows," subscriptions," etc.); data collected by advertising platforms that reveals cross-platform behaviours; off-platform transaction data, such a records of financial transactions; etc.
Think about the health-related data collected by your fitbit, Garmin or Apple watches, or that can be inferred from your searches for prescription drugs or for particular medical conditions. Do you know what happens with that data? Do you read the privacy and further use policies? If they reassure you, do you trust them? Be aware that, in spite of some legal protections (such as GDPR), there is widespread commerce in all these data, then you start to get the big picture--your life is an open book. And "trust" is beyond your control.
To me, the need for user education has to do with the broad ecosystem that the international internet now represents, not just the inner technical operations of a single platform.
WTAF. This article was clearly incredibly well researched and it’s clear that you put so much effort into it. I’m so sad that that fake writer had the audacity to steal your work. I’m glad that you called her out because that’s what led me to you.
I regularly visit YOUTUBE to view lectures by physicists, astronomers and researchers into Quantum Mechanics. I also am inspired by thinkers like Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. I am happy to say that despite considerable time spent on these programs, I have yet to be intruded upon by misogynist and hateful screeds.
I just love how it took years to uncover the absolute nightmare going on with YouTube - that we’re actively shoveling angry, lonely, vulnerable young men to alt-right nut jobs - and then REPEATED THE EXACT MISTAKE with TikTok.
The clowns running social media sites will literally enable the 4th reich before they make their apps even slightly less profitable (but infinitely safer)
Yup. Hate is far too profitable for them to completely ban it.
Why is it profitable though, I wonder?
Quite a few reports found (for instance, one by Tech Transparency Project) that social platforms place ads alongside hate speech content, search query results for extremist groups, etc. And since that stuff tends to get a lot of engagement, regardless of whether it's positive or negative, it likely generates a sizeable chunk of ad revenue.
Misogyny funds capitalism in America. And yet misogyny keeps America from creating/benefitting from social policies that promote economic growth. I think my head's gonna explode.
Oh that makes sense!
I watch mostly feminist content on YouTube, a little bit of true crime, some local news clips when something is going on, and cat/cute animal videos.
Every few days the algorithm will shove a bunch of misogynistic dude bro podcasts in my feed. It’s really strange it will come in a wave, then I won’t see it for a few days, then I get another wave.
If I see them on my phone I can click something that says do not show in my feed, or I don’t wish to see this, without even opening it. On my TV I would have to open the video to down vote or whatever, so I don’t. Maybe if I took the time to do that it would stop but I don’t even want to click on that nonsense.
Should I take the time to click on the nonsense or is that what YouTube wants and that’s why I get the nonsense?
ngl it is probably gunna pop up no matter what.
i’ve never found those “don’t show this kinda stuff” buttons really unhelpful, and borderline useless.
it doesn’t help that navigating youtube on TV is a nightmare 😅
It really is, if I wasn’t poor I would just pay for streaming services and I wouldn’t even have to deal with it.
if you use a VPN, and change your location to a poorer country, you can normally get a better deal.
for example, if you claim you’re from Nigeria, then you can get youtube premium for significantly less - instead of $15 it goes to something like $5 or so
Yes I should do that before they make VPNs illegal in the US with KOSA.
I know KOSA has a lot of flaws, and no amount of lipstick can save that pig, as the EFF notes. But banning VPNs? Is that really part of KOSA?
Who invented the algorithms? For the most part, it was men. Who own companies that have notoriously sexist practices and PR. So obviously they're not interested in giving women and non-white men much of a fair shake.
I remember reading about the algorithm for the post news site, owned by a wealthy white dude. It was not cool, basically they would shadow ban you if enough people muted you. I suppose that works if you like having your social media site full of political cults, so maybe that’s the goal there.
I like Mastodon. If I don’t like the way a server is run I can choose another. And there’s no algorithm.
A while back I was looking for some workout videos on YouTube. I don’t think I clicked enough to get into the truly misogynistic rabbit whole but it was definitely suggesting videos that were only a few degrees away. All I wanted were some lower back stretches!
Sadly, I'm not surprised.
Why is it considered misogynistic not to agree with feminism? Many people believe in some feminist ideas, but don’t embrace them all. Why must feminism never be questioned or opposed? Some feminist ideas are good, but not all. I don’t want my decisions about ideology taken away, and I am a woman who has a right to think whatever I want to think.
Where exactly in this post I implied it's misogynistic not to agree with feminism? Are you even familiar with the kind of messaging that the likes of Andrew Tate are pushing on young men and boys? It's not a well-balanced and insightful critique of feminism. It's a call for men to treat women like their property.
Feminism is questioned all the time - by feminists. There is no one feminism. If you believe women should not be treated as lesser than men, you are a feminist. How that can be achieved - that's something nobody has a definitive answer for and of ongoing debate.
You've written about this so well and it's truly crazy how many people don't realise the gravity of the power of recommender systems.
I'm currently writing my master's thesis on this topic and thought it might also be up your alley to check out this similar study conducted in Ireland that looks particularly at the links between stereotypically masculine, 'manosphere,' and then alt-right content being recommended to teen boys through algorithms on TikTok and Youtube. It's called "Recommending Toxicity: The role of algorithmic recommender functions on YouTube Shorts and TikTok in promoting male supremacist influencers" by the DCU anti-bullying centre and is absolutely worth the read.
I came across your essay because of maalvika and your note about her being a plagiarist. That sucks and I know all about how it feels having had my work plagiarised by none other than Graham Hancock, so I feel for you on that score.
That said, regarding this specific essay, you go on a lot about misogyny, but it’s not something you ever properly define or give examples of. And you simply assert that the radicalisation of young men includes thinking feminism has been a net negative. The implication we are supposed to have being that feminism has been a net good. But there is zero evidence that feminism has been good in general, and in fact plenty of evidence of its tragically toxic outcomes. In other words, you don’t make any argument. You present it as a fait accompli we are supposed to accept on faith. So, no. Your premise is completely wrong. I suggest you read up on the original promoters of feminism and the roots of that foul ideology of death.
You maybe want to pick up the book written by Rachel Wilson on it.
Who wrote the Algorithms?
Big Tech writes them
There is a lot of commentary on social media platforms, including this one, about "the algorithm," by which is meant sets of data processing rules that are applied to data and metadata managed on the platform. But it is not just about the methods by which these platforms provide recommendations or return search results. The key issue is that profile metadata that is collected in various ways. One, as you say, is through a user's behaviour in a particular context, where details of choices made inform and shape a user's profile in that context. But profiles are not built just by the data processing rules of a given platform.
Registering for a service typically gives away key information--Name, age, location, etc. If you pay for a service your card information provides a key for linking you to purchasing information in general. Thereafter profiles continue to be built by aggregating data from various sources--behaviour on the platform (completion of interest profiles; searches effected; "likes," "follows," subscriptions," etc.); data collected by advertising platforms that reveals cross-platform behaviours; off-platform transaction data, such a records of financial transactions; etc.
Think about the health-related data collected by your fitbit, Garmin or Apple watches, or that can be inferred from your searches for prescription drugs or for particular medical conditions. Do you know what happens with that data? Do you read the privacy and further use policies? If they reassure you, do you trust them? Be aware that, in spite of some legal protections (such as GDPR), there is widespread commerce in all these data, then you start to get the big picture--your life is an open book. And "trust" is beyond your control.
To me, the need for user education has to do with the broad ecosystem that the international internet now represents, not just the inner technical operations of a single platform.
“Welcome my son, welcome to the machine.” Pink Floyd
WTAF. This article was clearly incredibly well researched and it’s clear that you put so much effort into it. I’m so sad that that fake writer had the audacity to steal your work. I’m glad that you called her out because that’s what led me to you.
I thought it was a lack of accountability being called out.
Food for thought:
https://truespiritofamericaparty.blogspot.com/2024/04/how-to-solve-big-tech-problem-without.html
Oy vey. Now I want to throw up. This is so true and so disturbing. I'm totally doing a show on this next (I'll cite you)--it needs to be talked about.
I regularly visit YOUTUBE to view lectures by physicists, astronomers and researchers into Quantum Mechanics. I also am inspired by thinkers like Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. I am happy to say that despite considerable time spent on these programs, I have yet to be intruded upon by misogynist and hateful screeds.