You play enough baseball, it'll generate a few good 5 second clips. Looks like he's dancing. Just in case you hear anyone try to argue about this. I recall reading that they took action to curb this problem a long time ago. Not a good look. The upcoming recall has me very worried.
"I recall reading that they took action to curb this problem a long time ago."
I'd have to read the paper, but anecdotally...I can't agree that recommendations don't lead to lots of politically charged content I didn't want. It may not radicalize on its own, nor did it radicalize me (obviously...right? it's obvious?), but it's pretty insidious.
A couple obvious wedge issues led to this. Any form of firearm content, such as cleaning videos or even historical interest videos like Forgotten Weapons (whose host thankfully keeps political issue escalation to an absolute minimum) has led to recommendations for "hey brother"-esque content (men with big beards, dark sunglasses, and backwards caps ranting to their phones in their trucks), which I've dutifully removed from my feed. These aren't videos related to firearms themselves, although those videos often do contain snide asides about gun laws and Democratic states on an annoyingly-frequent basis.
In a more subtle fashion, when watching channels like Big Think (which have a variety of subjects across the political spectrum, especially before 2016), I get recommendations for IDW-types like Jordan Peterson or Sam Harris, as well as that argumentative idiot whose name escapes me. Peterson is particularly insidious. When I was trying to figure out his deal, a lot of his content was the most pedestrian version of his ideas, like clean your room, have self-confidence, build a good life for yourself. It failed to reflect his more conservative positions, such as his focus on Christian morality, traditional gender roles, and his constant gaslighting around his hate for anyone non-cis-gendered.
Again, while I'm willing to believe recommendations may not necessarily radicalize, at least by anecdata, I'm not willing to believe that it doesn't expose people to this content if they touch related topics.
So, I don't think the study clearly disproves the idea that recommendations will include radical content, they seem to come at it from the other direction: aiming to find out whether watching youtube actually did the radicalizing.
I think there's definitely space in this research to say that rather than causing people to change their views to become more radical, Youtube allows people to believe that they're not alone, making them less likely to de-radicalize.
So there's definitely room to say that social media including YouTube still results in people holding radical views, even if it's not 'causing' it. (I suspect it's possible to make stronger claims about Fox News, but that's out of scope)
"I recall reading that they took action to curb this problem a long time ago."
I'd have to read the paper, but anecdotally...I can't agree that recommendations don't lead to lots of politically charged content I didn't want. It may not radicalize on its own, nor did it radicalize me (obviously...right? it's obvious?), but it's pretty insidious.
A couple obvious wedge issues led to this. Any form of firearm content, such as cleaning videos or even historical interest videos like Forgotten Weapons (whose host thankfully keeps political issue escalation to an absolute minimum) has led to recommendations for "hey brother"-esque content (men with big beards, dark sunglasses, and backwards caps ranting to their phones in their trucks), which I've dutifully removed from my feed. These aren't videos related to firearms themselves, although those videos often do contain snide asides about gun laws and Democratic states on an annoyingly-frequent basis.
In a more subtle fashion, when watching channels like Big Think (which have a variety of subjects across the political spectrum, especially before 2016), I get recommendations for IDW-types like Jordan Peterson or Sam Harris, as well as that argumentative idiot whose name escapes me. Peterson is particularly insidious. When I was trying to figure out his deal, a lot of his content was the most pedestrian version of his ideas, like clean your room, have self-confidence, build a good life for yourself. It failed to reflect his more conservative positions, such as his focus on Christian morality, traditional gender roles, and his constant gaslighting around his hate for anyone non-cis-gendered.
Again, while I'm willing to believe recommendations may not necessarily radicalize, at least by anecdata, I'm not willing to believe that it doesn't expose people to this content if they touch related topics.
So, I don't think the study clearly disproves the idea that recommendations will include radical content, they seem to come at it from the other direction: aiming to find out whether watching youtube actually did the radicalizing.
I think there's definitely space in this research to say that rather than causing people to change their views to become more radical, Youtube allows people to believe that they're not alone, making them less likely to de-radicalize.
So there's definitely room to say that social media including YouTube still results in people holding radical views, even if it's not 'causing' it. (I suspect it's possible to make stronger claims about Fox News, but that's out of scope)