YouTube is not. It's a website that everyone uses, and where the most impressionable or least politically aware members of the population are the most numerous, easiest targets.
However I will say that Engineers, good ones, are accustomed to being wrong and taking the initiative to change their thinking.
> The volume of comments that are processed
> vastly exceeds what human moderation could possibly do
For every 500 comments, there is one video. For every 50 videos, there is one Channel with a Google user behind it. Force creators to handle the complaints about comments on their videos... an order of magnitude less work.I've gone into this before and there really seems to be total buy-in here to the idea that these companies couldn't possibly manage to weed the toxicity off their platforms. I don't believe it for an instant. It's true only if you refuse to entertain any decrease of "user engagement". If you are willing to lose some eyeballs, the problem is manageable.
And that sacrifice, in the case of YouTube, isn't even a sacrifice! YouTube would wind up with more users if the comments weren't so toxic. Susan et al just don't have the courage to change anything.
In practice, this will result in YouTubers disabling comments on their videos because most creators don't want to play moderator for toxic assholes.
... I'm okay with this. ;)
For example, that's how it can become possible for a politician to get elected who openly advocates torture or extrajudicial killings.
> And Hacker News comments are any better?
The most significant difference is that comments on HN tend be intelligent, well-reasoned and courteous, whereas comments on YouTube tend to be the psychotic rantings of paid trolls, foul-mouthed children, and hate groups.Yes, HN comments are better.
Like you say: I think it's a waste of time to condemn entire platforms - there are really interesting people in these places that can be always discovered. Here and on YouTube. Just be aware that there you might occasionally find yourself in a zone besieged.