YouTube Truth And the Amazon Fire:
YouTube is a great source of information. Content is available on every topic. The best information that can be seen at home. And the worst lies that are currently pushing the world towards extremism. Is it possible to create a system that allows YouTube to distinguish between truth and falsehood? If such a system were to be created, would everything be fine? Is YouTube interested in creating such a system or not?
The answers to all these questions are interesting.
300 hours of videos are uploaded to YouTube every minute. So many videos are uploaded in one day that it would take 82 years to watch them. It also contains videos made by someone's hard work and research and all kinds of myths, because anyone can upload a video. Which content is acceptable, which ones to show, which ads to receive, which videos to link to and which other videos to show. Humans can't do all this work, it's left to YouTube's algorithm. Each video passes through them as they are uploaded.
Whether or not the information in a video is accurate is not an easy task to determine.
How to rank what content?
The first step is to understand their business model. What about Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc.? These platforms earn almost all of their revenue through advertising. These are just some of the goal setting shareware that you can use. Useful content for the platform is what brings people to the platform and then puts it in them. If someone watches a whole long video, then it is a good video. It could be a comedian, it could be a documentary, it could be a drama, it could be a commentary on political ideologies. It doesn't matter what the platform is. Any video that forces people to spend time with this platform is good content. In the meantime, the platform can show its ads. The platform earns money from this and this money is shared with this video viewer. This is the success of this platform and its creators.
A video of a scientist recounting his many years of research, an expert craftsman sharing his art with others, a documentary maker providing some new information and a conspiracy theorist who Only yesterday I had an untouched idea. All are equal in the eyes of the platform. The only condition is who can get the most attention from the viewers.
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...
If this is the only standard in any platform, then a problem arises very quickly. The platform will only be a hotbed of conspiracy theories and sensational headlines. Because that's the best way to get attention. However, the platform has a problem with this. And this is a matter of fame. If it is known for its flat ground, anti-vaccine or extremist political ideologies, it will lose its credibility in the long run. People will go somewhere else. Good quality information is important for it to be effective and keep people for a long time. For this, steps are taken to give more importance to really good quality content. Now, on the other hand, the platform faces another choice. If only serious content remains, the platform will lose a large share of its user market. For those who aren't interested in serious content, the platform can't ignore them either. Therefore, they have to keep the content that attracts the attention of this market. Where there is thought-provoking content, there are also videos made to go viral. Flying saucers with space science. Ancient space creatures with history. As well as haunted houses with new tourist destinations. The same challenge applies to Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc. Where to draw the balance line? No one has an easy or correct answer to this.
Whatever you want, you can find it here.
.. .. .. .. .. .. ...
These social information platforms are downgrading content that is completely misrepresented to improve its reputation so that its reach is limited. However, there is another big problem here. These fact-checking algorithms still work only on English content. Other languages have a high proportion of frivolous, inaccurate and misleading content. The propaganda of conspiratorial elements in languages other than English is not being filtered at all at the moment.
An example from Brazil.
The Zika virus spread in Brazil in 2016. Conspiracy theories were made about it. Haier Bolsanoro was the one who propagated these conspiracy theories on YouTube. This type of content became very popular. He gained fame from it. Following his popularity, he continued to expand his theories. It is impossible to counter a well-crafted and sensational conspiracy theory.
The strategy of spreading sensational content through YouTube and WhatsApp was successful. The battle of facts and emotions was one-sided. The unnamed Bolsano from Far Right has won the council election only once before. He is currently the President of Brazil after winning the 2018 election. The Zika virus and other problems are the same. What was to happen to them? However, they are believed to be responsible for a series of wildfires in the Amazon this year and heavy damage to the global environment. (Details from the links below).
Conspiracy theories are not harmless. Brazil in this caseI am not alone
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. ...
Finally an experience of thinking.
Would it make a difference if a super intelligent algorithm could be developed that could clearly distinguish between all kinds of lies and truth, falsehood and right?
What would be my reaction if an algorithm tells me that an idea, an item that is part of my core identity is wrong? For example, tell me the mistakes of my favorite political figure. Call any treatment I believe wrong. What would happen if I pointed out a mistake of my people in an incident which I could not believe? It won't change my mind, maybe it will make my voice louder.
Everyone gets their own truth on this platform. True and False, True and False, Original and Copy, we have to learn to distinguish between the two. There is no algorithm for this.
Read More Cool Stuff on ...
0 Comments