Slashdot Mirror


Google Announces New Measures To Fight Extremist YouTube Videos (cnet.com)

An anonymous reader quotes CNET: YouTube will take new steps to combat extremist- and terrorist-related videos, parent company Google said Sunday. "While we and others have worked for years to identify and remove content that violates our policies, the uncomfortable truth is that we, as an industry, must acknowledge that more needs to be done. Now," Kent Walker, Google's general counsel, said in an op-ed column in the London-based Financial Times.
Here's CNET's summary of the four new measure Google is implementing:
  • Use "more engineering resources to apply our most advanced machine learning research to train new 'content classifiers' to help us more quickly identify and remove such content."
  • Expand YouTube's Trusted Flagger program by adding 50 independent, "expert" non-governmental organizations to the 63 groups already part of it. Google will offer grants to fund the groups.
  • Take a "tougher stance on videos that do not clearly violate our policies -- for example, videos that contain inflammatory religious or supremacist content." Such videos will "appear behind a warning" and will not be "monetized, recommended or eligible for comments or user endorsements."
  • Expand YouTube's efforts in counter-radicalization. "We are working with Jigsaw to implement the 'redirect method' more broadly. ... This promising approach harnesses the power of targeted online advertising to reach potential Isis recruits, and redirects them towards anti-terrorist videos that can change their minds about joining."

3 of 286 comments (clear)

  1. Re:What about Kyle Kullinski, Darvid Pakman, etc. by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, by liberal Silicon Valley rules, it will work like this:

    If they criticize Christianity, then it's free speech

    If they criticize Islam, then it's racism and hate speech.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  2. Re:What about Kyle Kullinski, Darvid Pakman, etc. by epyT-R · · Score: 5, Interesting

    An atheist is someone who does not have a belief in deities. It offers no justification. An agnostic atheist does not believe due to lack of evidence. This has nothing to do with Dawkins except that he probably is one.

    Dawkins rightfully criticizes islam for its intolerant doctrines, esp towards women, gays, and non-believers. This should not surprise you as he has always been quite vocal and critical towards irrational belief systems. The funny thing is, if this was prior to ~2004, you'd probably be on board with him. At some point, the left will have to deal with this schizophrenic conflict between what used to be called 'liberal values' and islam. I just hope it's not at the expense of the former.

  3. Re:What about Kyle Kullinski, Darvid Pakman, etc. by goose-incarnated · · Score: 5, Informative

    . At some point, the left will have to deal with this schizophrenic conflict between what used to be called 'liberal values' and islam.

    It's not as hard as you think, and it's not a schizophrenic conflict. It's garden variety human hatred. There's Islam, and then there's the hateful cult that justifies itself in its name.

    Damn big cult, seeing as more than 2/3 of the Islamic population support Sharia Law ...

    Stoning gays for being gay. How very progressive.

    The problem is you are working under the mistaken belief that the Islamic regressives are a small minority of the Islamic population. They are not. They are the clear majority.

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.