Hacker News Reader

Comment by WhyNotHugo | Hacker News Reader

YouTube has been changing in weird ways in the last year or so.

The amount of propaganda on the platform is ridiculous, though very frequently disguised as "news" or "educational". As someone who's been around quite a bit, I can also imagine that it doesn't look like propaganda to average Americans (I'd be glad to be wrong on this).

A great deal of content is just plain sophistry too. Inspecting comments, it seems that most viewers don't pick up on this.

At the same time, finding reviews or alike for products or services is near impossible -- the platform is filled with generic reviews which are indistinguishable form ads.

View on HN

I can also imagine that it doesn't look like propaganda to average Americans

It looks like propaganda to us too.

We're not quite as dumb as the rest of the world thinks. That said, I suppose everyone's a bit dumber than they think they are, so take my statement with a grain of salt.

The way that they've changed search to only link to checkmarked channels is infuriating. When Kabul was falling I wanted to see older videos of the embassy, from when it was opened, to see the buildings and how extravagant they were. I couldn't find any, though, because no matter what I searched I got videos from news channels released within the past 24 hours about evacuating the embassy. The war on "misinformation" needs to stop.

>The amount of propaganda on the platform is ridiculous, though very frequently disguised as "news" or "educational".

I certainly don't see that on the youtube channels I frequent, but admit that the 'news' is typically op-ed disguised as news.

An alternative theory is that they (youtube) pushes 'news' since it pays well and is quite popular. 'News' tends to come from official channels over time with a kind of network effect. Those channels are all Pravda. The fact that it's propaganda is not necessarily a youtube choice but a major news organization choice.

Watch one "conservative news" video and it will do a complete 180. Ads for "rations", "preparing for the end of the world", "how to be self sustainable", tons of PragerU propaganda, and some of the most low quality l BS you'll ever see from political ads.

YouTube delivers content based on what you've watched.

Yeah I watched some 'forgotten weapons' and 'demolition ranch' videos, and it was wild how quickly my feed changed from science and history stuff to conservative talking points. I spent a rather long time marking videos as 'do not recommend this channel, I dislike this video' etc, before things returned to normal.

Another simple way to address this is to remove uninteresting videos from history, then recommendations go back to normal. We have to do it on our kids account periodically.

I just fully revoked Google from keeping any data on my viewing habits and for some time now my YouTube main page has been a rehash of popular videos from my subscribed channels (and the occasional cat video). I sure don't miss the craziness desperately trying to get me to watch as much as possible.

Man, I had a similar problem

I watched something right wing, I can't remember what, and for years YouTube was bombarding me with crazy half-truths and memes. I tuned them out just like most of the other bullshit I get bombarded with all day, but I wonder how many people have been radicalized this way..

I watch a lot of lefty "news" and infotainment. I still get ads for the conservative propaganda, survival rations, prepping, etc. I think it's because I also watch a lot of firearms hobby content.

Kinda silly, but it does make me chuckle that people like Ben Shapiro, PragerU, and 4Patriots are subsidizing my lefty youtube subscriptions.

I mostly consume guitar technique & music theory videos, yet I still see ads suggesting I might want to buy & bury a plastic tote full of MREs out in the wilderness just in case. Maybe it's because I live in Nebraska? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

That's probably part of it, but you can tell YouTube to stop showing you those videos. The algorithm does work it's just kind of like a 7-year-old.

Same here, 95% of my YT consumption is related to advanced music theory. The (constant) ads that drive me up a wall are the "learn to play guitar" services that feature children practicing their first guitar notes. Ive heard this from other musicians too - the algorithm thinks everyone is a novice.

What’s particularly fascinating is how there is an almost complete absence of a leftist equivalent on YT. There are some leftist channels here and there, but you’re not going to get bombarded with communist ads after watching one video like you might on the right.

It's strictly a function of funding and the economic power of the interested parties. Rich capitalists are, naturally, invested in promoting policies, ideologies, and politicians that will 1) keep them being rich capitalists and 2) make them richer capitalists. I don't know, but am fairly confident in stating, that there are not rich communists waging a communistic propaganda campaign in order to keep them being rich communists and making them richer communists. Certainly not in the Anglosphere, anyway.

You’re not wrong, but leftists also tend to spend an inordinate amount of energy and resources fighting internecine battles rather than trying to convert others. This does make it rather hard to do things like run self-reinforcing YT campaigns, assuming YT would tolerate them.

I like to tell myself that's because real lefties adhere to the doctrine of Gil Scott Heron, The Revolution Will Not be Televised, even though they won't understand 99% of the cultural references

I’m split between two causes myself.

1) The utter lack of support from monied interests.

2) The fact that leftists love nothing more than fighting slightly different types of other leftists.

"I like to tell myself" isn't a strong indication of something that I actually believe. So, here goes

3) the radical left is a bogeyman and the reason you don't see many of them is that they're exceptionally rare.

4) radical leftists have better opsec after generations of actual persecution and censorship, and don't do youtube

5) I think tiktok is more popular with the left?

In my country we still have a old school communist party, and despite their radical ideas like saying north Korea is a democracy or support maduro in Venezuela, when you hear their political campaign is all about raising minimum wage and a restricted House market. In the other way, when we look at the far right party, it's all about how the immigrants are eating tax money or defending a small government with a total control for one leader.

So it's not that radical left doesn't exist, it's just that they drop their guns and what's left it's not that loud.

My apologies, that was written from a purely anglocentric perspective.

No apologies needed, I was just trying to add a new perspective :)

Calling PragerU propaganda is like calling an Western history book written by a religious person contraband. What exact points do you take umbrage with or is this just a signal to your political preference?

Here's a counterpoint for you, regarding the 'war on cars': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7z8Tb7OA_F4

Meh, I'm still not seeing what make it propaganda, instead of just a terrible argument.

Nobody is as blind as he who does not want to see.

PragerU is the one funding advertisements with wild, baseless, and often scientifically dishonest "research". I don't recall traditional universities doing this. They firmly market themselves as "conservative intellectuals", telling you the "real truth" liberals won't recognize. I'd call that propaganda by definition.

Propaganda, according to Wikipedia:

> Propaganda is communication that is primarily used to influence an audience and further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be selectively presenting facts to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is being presented.[1]

PragerU's "About Us" Page:

> Prager University is the world's leading conservative nonprofit that is focused on changing minds through the creative use of digital media. Taking full advantage of today's technology and social media, we educate millions of Americans and young people about the values that make America great.[2]

I'd also encourage you to check out their "What is PragerU"[3] brochure (PDF) which goes into more detail.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda

[2]https://www.prageru.com/about

[3]https://assets.ctfassets.net/qnesrjodfi80/UfBbMy7KkcxxjzVTlR...

Late night show Zondag met Lubach put this to the test: https://youtu.be/FLoR2Spftwg (English CC available. Skip to 11:48 if you just want to see this bit.)

They created a fresh account using a fresh browser, clicked the top result for “PCR test reliable”, then some recommended videos. Just three clicks in they get to 9/11 and qanon conspiracy videos. By then their home feed too is full of that stuff.

This seems rather vague. Can you give examples of propaganda?

Oh come on... spend 10 minutes on YouTube and you'll find tons of it.

There have been countless articles and posts written about this problem over the last several years.

I would challenge _you_ to go educate yourself on this rather than ask others to bring this widely available and widely accepted information to you.

The current “ivermectin is a dangerous horse dewormer” debacle has been the biggest example of a moment where I’m not sure whether everyone is lying at this point. YouTube censored a few videos with actual experts and doctors who were discussing ivm.

Yes we had issues with HCQ in the beginning, but ivm is being actually studied right now by Oxford Uni/NHS in their big covid trials in the UK… it’s amazing what a hit job the media is doing on it.

There's a difference between trials and it being suitable for public use though, right? It is undeniably a horse dewormer, and has had some use on humans, but not as a covid treatment.

For me, it's about preventing people that aren't medical professionals from self-medicating with a potentially harmful substance. Plus there's been some less than stellar suggestions of covid treatments in the past ranging from dubious to lethal. If it turns out to be safe, then doctors will no doubt prescribe it as necessary.

I would hope so.

My point about “horse dewormer” is that some articles in the media list it as just that without mentioning at all that it is also human medication. Look at the recent articles about Joe Rogan, they couldn’t stop themselves.

Afaik the only difference between human and animal ivm are levels of impurity.

That's because people are literally buying and eating horse dewormer. Its in a package that says "horse dewormer" on it. It's sold at livestock stores in the "horse medicine" section. The media is 100% correct to call what people are poisoning themselves with "horse dewormer".

I bet you get mad at the news for reporting rain because water exists in other forms, and has other ways of moving about besides rain right?

Did Joe Rogan literally buy and eat something from a package that says "horse dewormer" on it? You willingly ignored the salient parts of the comment you responded to (ironically providing more evidence of the very phenomenon that they're trying to discuss).

No, it was prescribed by his doctor.

Which brings up another point: some pharmacies are refusing to fill it, even when prescribed by a doctor. If you want to place the blame for people getting "horse dewormer", such pharmacies deserve part of the blame.

Too bad most of the people who want horse dewormer were the same people who wanted the "pharmacist conscience" laws that allow pharmacists to deny their veterinary prescriptions. Who would have thought that such a law would come back to bite them.

Since you dodged the question, it's worth asking again.

The complaint, stated by sprafa, is: "Look at the recent articles about Joe Rogan, they couldn’t stop themselves."

... to which you responded, ignoring the complaint and doubling down, right before kicking it up a notch with a personal attack/shameless attempt to strawman ("I bet you get mad at the news for[...] right?").

So did Rogan literally buy and eat something from a package that says "horse dewormer" or not?

It's really hard to poison yourself with ivermectin if you're a vertebrate. Apparently the total number of poisoning cases in the US, a country of 330 million people, is about 500, and the vast majority of those cases had minor or no effects; people were just worried. So if you buy horse dewormer in a livestock store and take it, you'll probably still be fine.

https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/too-good-to-check-a-pl...

Calling ivermectin horse dewormer is like calling penicillin cow antibiotics or fish tank saver.

It's in significant use in humans.

It's in significant use in humans as a dewormer, though. It's used in humans to treat river blindness which is caused by a worm. It's also used for the prevention of worms in dogs. It's fair to call it a dewormer, even if you disagree with including the 'horse' part.

It's not an anti-viral in any sense of the word.

Correct, and while it's use as an anti-viral has been noted pre-covid we don't understand what it's method of action is, or why it sometimes behaves as an anti-viral.

I'm not recommending using drugs we don't understand or have a full picture of. I am recommending to stop calling it horse dewormer. At the very least call it an anti-parasitic in use in the 3rd and 2nd worlds.

You can drop the '3rd and 2nd worlds' part. It's used for the treatment of parasites in the 1st world as well.

I'm not a infectious diseases expert, but to my knowledge the viruses that it's been found to be effective against are all mosquito borne; it's just as likely related to it's toxic action on mosquitos in general. Still, it's all baseless conjecture on everyone's part. If someone cares to throw money at it, it's something that can be investigated.

At the end of the day just get the widely available vaccine and move on with life, like you would for other viruses that we've got vaccines for. I feel like we're all making this way harder than it has to be just so we can all continue to yell at each other.

I believe there have been studies showing that ivermectin is not useful against covid in these situations either.

Two people in my circle were taking IVM pre-pandemic to treat rosacea and lyme disease. This is not an obscure drug in the 1st world. It also doesn't need to be an anti-viral to work on covid - it's already a general anti-inflammatory. Inflammation of the lungs is why people can't breath and often die, and that inflammation is due to the body's own immune response, not the virus itself. The virus is gone by that point. But our standard protocol at first symptoms does not include treating potential inflammation, so by the time people get to hospital it's often too late. It's not good.

Ok, I'll be more specific. Using the word "horse" is like calling other medications that are used on people and dogs as "dog" medicine.

The qualifier is not necessary. Truthfully, they should just call it ivermectin and describe what it actually is, how it has actually been used, and the current state of research showing that currently has little proof of effectiveness though there are trials ongoing.

Exactly. But no one does this. Why?

I figured that term had taken off because people were acquiring it from farm stores or pet supply places, so they were literally buying "horse dewormer", as it might be labeled on the packaging or signage. Same as they do for other off-prescription medications (antibiotics).

I mean, it's quite likely the ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine has some effect against the virus in the early stages of infection, but their use needs to be balanced against their side effects, of which there are many. It's like how bleach kills cancer cells, but you really shouldn't be treating cancer with it...

I believe ivermectin is a far safer drug than HCQ.

I mean, it's great that you personally believe something, but to make ethical medical decisions we need lots of clinical data. If your belief is well founded, which it damn well might be, the data should bear that out.

The data on the safety of Ivermectin is very well established. It's well-known to be very safe with pretty minimal side effects and extremely low serious side effect rates despite the billions of doses handed out over the past decades.

The real question is about its anti-viral properties. We know they exist, but don't know why or to what extent. Further, we don't know if they extend to COVID and we don't now if the effective dosage is high enough to increase the rates of side effects (especially bad ones).

The result is extremists on both sides saying wild garbage. Either it's the salvation of mankind hidden from you by the grand conspiracy or it's toxic horse dewormer that will certainly kill anyone who even approaches it.

This is a real problem. If I were researching Ivermectin and COVID, I'd be scared that loonies from one side or the other might attempt to hurt me or ruin my life over their delusions.

We have lots of clinical data, their belief is well founded, and the data does bear that out. It's as if you commented without even skimming the Wikipedia article about ivermectin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivermectin#Contraindications

It is rather vague, but I have the same impression. So N=2

Anything you see on the front page of youtube, i.e. you didn't specifically search for it, is most likely being promoted by some ad agency or think tank somewhere down the line. Meaning it's propaganda to some extent. The exceptions to this rule are, of course, independent creators that the algorithm latches onto, but the algorithm only promotes videos that people are gonna click on and generate revenue for Youtube. That is, in a way, controlled propaganda too.

I see "African grey parrot singing along to I can see clearly now", "Cucumbers are cat's enemy - Funny Pet Reaction | Purr Purr", "Cockatoo Farts and Runs Away", "House Relax: Ed Sheeran, Martin Garrix, Kygo, Dua Lipa, Avicii, The...", "Venezuela 1-3 Argentina | Eliminatorias a Qatar 2022 -...", etc.

This is because yesterday I looked at videos of Alex the African grey parrot.

As far as I can tell, there are no ad agencies or think tanks involved here, except I guess that Atlantic Records made Ed Sheeran more popular than he was already by promoting him. I think this is pretty much purely "videos that people are gonna click on".

The propaganda is in what's missing.

I see the "House Relax" one when I go to YouTube in a private window without signing in. It seems to be one of the "stock" links that YouTube shows complete newbies that have never been there before (as far as it knows), so I'm guessing it's pretty strongly advertised presumably at the behest of the ad agencies.

I do, always, see three or four covid-19 videos when I go to the main YT page. Whatever you think about their message, they look like propaganda to me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com