Youtube purges have begun

oh no not the autistic poltard redditors
anything but them!!!

Jesus fuck this is censorship,

Some anons will try to downplay it, but it is truly censorship.

Maybe we can petition the gov to put the foot on youtube, If a platform is big (and youtube is huge) then it must abide by equality as written in the constitution

>>38995691

No it doesn't. It's privately owned and can do whatever it wants. It sucks, but it's true. Only the gov can't censor you(even though they do lol,) but that doesn't stop anyone else from doing it.

Also you are thinking of the bill of rights, not the constitution, c'mon anon they repeat the same shit at you for 12 goddamn years, did none of it stick?

It has always been ogre anon.

>>38995571
>People on /r9k/ are so contrarian that they rebel against the political consensus that is established on 4chan as an act of edgy contrarianism against a left-wing establishment
It's beautiful to watch in motion.

File: CL4uTorWUAARXEE.jpg (20KB, 349x356px) Image search: [Google]

20KB, 349x356px

>>38995537
>giant media corporation with liberal agenda shuts down anything that isn't liberal
wow never heard of that happening before

This was a long time coming. Did you honestly expect it to last forever? Don't lose hope entirely, all it takes is another video hosting site and it's okay again.

File: Solidus_death.jpg (92KB, 467x700px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 467x700px

>>38995927
The problem is they have too much power over information and media, so when they push an agenda the agenda gets pushed HARD.

>>38995537
Finally. Video sharing is a terrible tool to spread politics. Even though there has to be an opposition to bigger media sources, YouTube only gave rise to brainlets like Twatson and FashWeabooSpeaks and other faggots chasing buck and not giving a fuck about intellectual quality of their crap, freely abusing all propagandistic capabilities moving image has. It would be cool if we would return to small newspapers (online, obviously) managed by creative and hard-working types instead of shit we have right now.

>>38995832
No, boyscouts used to deny black people the chance to join. Government made a ruling saying that since this organization is so huge, and not like a white supremacist group or something, they have to abide by constitutional laws for equality

The fact is that google can't do what it's doing.

We have stare decisis on our side

>>38995963
Only saving grace is that people arnt stupid enough to fall for it they usually tell them to fuck off.

>>38996012
That's only because they announce these changes for now.
If they say, subtly removed dissenting search results, the majority of people wouldn't even notice.

>>38996008
Google probably figured out a way to automate this shitshow. They probably scan captions to see for "nono phrases"

So, a suggestion I heard.

We create throwaway accounts and spam "hitler did nothing wrong" on the Jewgle approved media.

They'll have to filter shit by hand, and filtering shit by hand is expensive and time consuming.

May deter google from doing this

>>38996008
>widespread racial oppression is the same as deleting videos
Hate to break it to ya, but I don't think law is on your side.

>>38996089
It's a type of fruit, but still a fruit.

First amendment, 14th, still part of the constitution

File: reeepepe.jpg (19KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 640x640px

>>38995537
don't care about these fags but they have fucked with the youtuber that has helped me out the most jordan peterson
also i want something to meme against google seems like a fair target it's full of normie scum

>>38996117
You don't have user agreements in shops and cafe doesn't host your content. And there's no indespensible identity under threat, so why is race case is relevant I don't really understand.

In 5 years no one will even remember YouTube
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-40883588

>>38996518
That retard wants to be the president.

I swear, one more president with NO experience. We need to plead the second

File: 1431907631000.jpg (24KB, 396x396px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 396x396px

>>38995537

Its a good thing.

The viewer bases of these channels are not educated adults or intellectuals, it is children and young adults. Removing this content is not censorship, you have the option to view it off youtube if the creators decide to upload it elsewhere. It is more like hiding the content away from impressionable young people like you would with a R18 or porn movie.

Its bad for youtube as a business (which it is) to host this content, so it makes perfect sense.

File: 1502420895088.jpg (22KB, 320x322px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 320x322px

>>38995537
>>38995537
>Info wars will run forever!
>This is an INFORMATION WAR

Hello info wars. Nice shill. But you are right alas dont post bullshit on ym r9k.

File: 51YGq8kKLwL._SY450_.jpg (31KB, 319x450px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 319x450px

>>38996933
>The viewer bases of these channels are not educated adults or intellectuals

You could say that for most of youtube content creators on the left and the non politcal stuff, like the jake paul fag who is a crazy disney kid star, who has a young impressionable audience.


quit being a edgy contrarian faggot

File: 1424060183347s.jpg (2KB, 125x101px) Image search: [Google]

2KB, 125x101px

All they are doing is stopping the add revenue of controversial channels. This is not "censorship".

If they want to get paid for advertisement by putting out videos, make content advertises are happy to be associated with. Its pretty simple marketing.

All of these channels are money grabs. You are delusional to think otherwise. If there message was so important, they wouldn't care so much about getting paid to put out videos that take a few hours to make.

>>38997036

There is plenty of decent content on youtube for a more mature audience. It is obviously just stuff that you have not payed attention too because it is not what you are interested in.

Its the whole issue with the younger generation today. They want the edgy rants and accessible content. No 18 year old wants to watch hour lectures analyzing political policy. Its the age we live in though, its why trump had so much support. People want entertainment, not politics.

>>38997123
this shit is ad friendly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ts27Az1uTsI
but this isn't
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHqybEnPqbQ
watch this ^ explains why the advertisers are pulling out with muh controversial channels.
edgelords buy shit too

>>38997236
I do i watch cspan and lectures by jordan peterson and others peterson who is being censored because muh hate speech.

>>38997236
Link some then.

>>38997257
Any content with any meaning should be supported.
We should start a deGoogle general, like >>>/g/

People said in 2008 that Youtube was done for, because of the acquisition of Youtube by Google and the slow introduction of ads.

Then, they said in 2013 that Google+ would kill it all! But it never did. These are sensationalist ideologues who think the internet should be their consequence-free playground, and when things slightly change, they don't like it. For all the "forward thinking" internet people do, especially millennials, they are incredibly regressive.

>>38997257
I remember Youtube said they're gonna demonetize the Spiderman Elsa channels for misleading contents.

File: 848.png (205KB, 659x525px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 659x525px

>>38997333
Nice digits anon kek approve's, would be nice to rage against this ubernormie company, something regardless of politic's or lack of we could all get behind and meme against.

also this the thread you mean >>>/g/61811737

>>38997285
>jordan peterson
Pseud, nothing of value is lost.

>>38997415
source and did they
they are very weird and disturbing

File: 1495894156993.png (17KB, 746x600px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 746x600px

Why should I care about literal redditors and /pol/ users being purged from youtube?
I don't even like /pol/ they're like an even more frenzied /b/ from 2007, except lathered in political bullshit.

None of the people I watch will be affected by this at all, so I say good riddance.

File: 1483369336059.png (144KB, 1098x1006px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 1098x1006px

>>38997455
Hahahaha and your such the intellectual,
did he hurt your communist tranny feels.

>>38996933
It makes them lots of money, how exactly is that bad for business? It's good for business, bad for their feelings. We all know google doesn't care much about money.

>>38997490
You're a spawn of the entertainment era and a living proof why political YouTube must go.

>>38995537
EEMEJUN MAYNE SHOCC

>>38996933
>>38995571
>>38997123
>>38997357
>>38997455
>>38997471
>>38997538
Wow so many shills in this thread

>>38997538
>You're a spawn of the entertainment era
Wtf you on about youtube started out has a place for fucking cat video's and fake prank video's,
we are already well into the the entertainment era.

File: 1435581390317.png (591KB, 750x650px) Image search: [Google]

591KB, 750x650px

>>38997257

Its add friendly because advertises don't mind being associated with it. If they did mind, they would pull add revenue. Its really as simple as that.

Advertising firms don't see the benefit of advertising to teenagers/young adults (who generally have limited buying power) through controversial material that may alienate demographics with more economic capital.

Regardless of what your political views are, this is pretty simple to understand - and it is completely different to censorship. Youtube is a business. Its job is to make a profit. It can block any content it likes for any reason (obviously being a business though, it will not block content that has no negative impact on profits).

Again, this is completely different to censorship. Its a private company. You are free to make your own where you decide what content gets published! You can even block all those evil left videos!

>>38997285

Read above, and then tell me how is being censored.

>>38997318

Literally type any subject you want to watch a video about and search the catalog. Think before you post.

>>38996933
>>38997471
Good post, Mr Soros would be proud

>>38995832
>I support free speech!
>...but not in the workplace
>...and not in any private company
>...and not in schools or universities
>...and not during public speeches
>...and not on the internet
>...and not in video games
>...and not in books, either
>...and not outside, in public

So where is free speech acceptable? At the bottom of the ocean?

>>38996933
There is plenty of shit they could get rid of with that justification and they don't. And by your logic any political content at all is harmful to impressionable 12 year olds, except you're biased so you think only the wrong opinions should be censored.

I don't want to make an argument on a free speech basis because I don't particularly care about that. But the fact is that neoliberals have FIRMLY rooted themselves in the media and private sphere. They're so hard to root out because they almost seem benign, but get ready for more open borders and crusades for democracy in the future.

File: MoreThanARapefugee.jpg (112KB, 1122x786px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 1122x786px

>>38997634
YT uploads controversial political propaganda clips that get down-voted into oblivion, while censoring a channel that has over a million subs and very positive ratings

How is this suposed to bring them profit?
Let's face the truth: those actions aren't motivated with money but with ideology

>>38997639
Oh no "Soros", I don't really know who that is or what they do but /pol/ says I should be afraid of them!

>your channel is being shut down because of hate speech
>meanwhile Stephen Colbert, Samantha Bee, Trevor Noah, Seth Meyers, John Oliver, Jimmy Kimmel, Vox, GQ, and Bill Mahler monologues-- that hate speech goes on the front page

>>38997123
They know who's controversial. We know this isn't some pragmatic decision since google has made their political stances very clear on numerous occasions. They are always consistent.

>>38997634
>>38997670
(((Google))) employee spotted, fuck off

>>38997514

It clearly doesn't though, otherwise they would not be demonstrating content.

Its bad for investors and for advertisement firms to be associated to controversial political beliefs.

>>38995902
>against a left-wing establishmen

>left wing establishment with a right winger in the white house and right wingers in congress

face it faggot, you ARE the establishment

>>38997634
Capitalism btfo in one post

THIS is why we need the natsoc revolution, I finally see it now. Thanks for opening my eyes man!

File: why freedom if speech is important.jpg (528KB, 1425x810px) Image search: [Google]

528KB, 1425x810px

Daily reminder that liberals HATE Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence and our 3rd president because he owned slaves and supported freedom of speech.

>>38997634
they banned his youtube account and his gmail
they gave no reason why

https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/892449213556166658?lang=en

https://twitter.com/jordanbpeterson/status/892413915069657089

only came back once there was a huge out cry

>>38997706
W E W

Objectively speaking the left has been the establishment in the US county since independence. That's the first thing to realize.

File: dwagg.jpg (174KB, 1122x786px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 1122x786px

>>38997682
>>38997634
>>38996933
>controversial views

Tell me which one is controversial here, fuckwits

File: e70795f5e31bd90ecbc8d77570fa5358631382e8.jpg (13KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 320x320px

>>38997634
>There is plenty of decent content on youtube for a more mature audience. It is obviously just stuff that you have not payed attention too because it is not what you are interested in.


>Literally type any subject you want to watch a video about and search the catalog. Think before you post.

Fucking link some mature content then.

>>38995537
>PJW and BPS are gone
And nothing of value was lost

File: 1432912309991.jpg (47KB, 448x463px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 448x463px

>>38997664
>>38997660

Youtube (and google as a whole) is pushing an agenda, no doubt about it. Again though, its just business.

Advertisers want to connect with the 20-50 year old middle class demographic who have larger expendable incomes. Generally this demographic is left/center leaning and also is the largest user base of social media and broadcasting sites.

Hopefully you follow what I am saying as it is hard to explain in limited words. This is not really a new thing though, similar to how TV channels might push a certain agenda. I am not American, but I would imagine FOX plays adds that appeal more to the working class.

File: Zeromgs4.jpg (155KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 800x600px

This was not the boss's vision...

File: 1502418132787.jpg (58KB, 674x430px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 674x430px

>>38997787
No one cares mainstream media meme guy or literally who, this thread has gone to are the google higher up's shilling their liberal normie idealogy, on to us by censoring and demonetizing controversial but popluar channels.

>>38997682
I guess that makes sense. I was at a strip club last week, which I detest with a passion. I saw a commercial for Febreeze come on while I was standing in line at the buffet and decided to boycott febreeze after that.

I never understood why nobody has made a decent competitor site to youtube. I guess youtube has really fast servers and systems built over time, all the other sites just feel really clunky and slow.

>>38997740
The one which is not pushed by (((them)))
Fuck off Kurwa

>>38996933
>>38997634
>>38997814
Kys weeaboo retard

>>38997860
There has been dailymotion but it never got as big userbase

>>38997779

I honestly am confused buddy? Just search something you are interested in and find a non-pandering video?

If you are searching for pokemon episode reviews, sure it might be a bit difficult.

>>38997814
Your entire argument does that yt wants to attract older people with more money? Seriously?

>>38997886
You implyed, i don't watch mature content so am asking you what do you watch then.

>Fight the New World Order.
>Depend on a giant international corporation with ties to the NSA for distribution of information.

>>38997900

Basically. Advertisers want to advertise to people with money. This influences googles decisions.

Its a very surface level way of looking at it, but that's it in a nut shell.

You need to remember, 99% of people have no clue what alt-right even means. The idea that these channels are getting blocked is something they wouldn't spend more then 5 seconds thinking about.

File: rfsgfg.jpg (105KB, 974x723px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 974x723px

>>38997814
>The leftist agenda is clearly unpopular among the userbase, as evidenced by the massive downvoting and the success of right-wing channels
>Pushing the leftist agenda is a sound business decision
Pick one.

>inb4 muh 40 year-olds have more money
Firstly, statistics show that middle-aged people are more conservative in general.
Secondly, disposable income doesn't matter much for sites like YT - thaey get revenue from views and advertisements.

Overall, you're just a leftist shill who enjoys soft censorship and should fuck off.

File: alex.png (574KB, 534x528px) Image search: [Google]

574KB, 534x528px

>>38997814
20-50 year old middle class demographic,
after 30 they are over 50% republican and get inceasingly more republican, of the one's under 30 it's around 33% republican it make's no business sense what so ever to alienate them.

>>38997949
Never mind the fact that millennials are the best people to advertise to. Young, no kids, early in their careers and always looking for a new experience or sensation. Politically they lean slightly to the right, dissatisfied with the status quo and hungry for novelty. One downside is less brand loyalty unless it can be sold as a lifestyle like Nike or Apple markets the brand as, but with the right strategy this is actually a positive. Sounds a lot better than some dumbass Gen-Xer who just buys the cheapest shit in the store or the boomer who buys kleenex because it is kleenex and that's all they've ever bought. Saying it's a business decision is so weak it doesn't stand under the slightest bit of scrutiny. Outside of Google, companies and their investors do look at market research and make decisions based on where the money is.

>>38995537
oh no, racists are getting their voices and youtube bucks taken away what a shame :^)

File: 574eaeeb160000ab02f94f29.jpg (53KB, 630x419px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 630x419px

>>38998015
nice bait kid but your kind has already been btfo'd
hopefully no more (you)'s 4 u

File: 1436011943662.png (384KB, 705x646px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 705x646px

>>38997949

This graph means little, as it gives no indication of the persons class or economic capital, but even without considering that it backs up my claim. Notice how under 44 year olds have higher numbers for democrats/other parties?

I understand you want a simple graph to explain what is going on, but a lot of data and statistics needs to be analysed to give consensus. If it is an interest to you, you should look at studying in the area of marketing.

If you want to base your argument of a simple graph like this though, you can use it to help in understanding what I am explaining.

People pay a large amount of money to get formal education in economic and marketing theory. I can only make it so easy to understand on a Cambodian pumpkin carving forum.

File: Citation needed.png (47KB, 2400x259px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 2400x259px

>>38997969

Please cite.

>>38998068
>Advertisers want to connect with the 20-50 year old middle class demographic who have larger expendable incomes. Generally this demographic is left/center

Show us your proof then, or we just meant to take your word for it because you say so.

>>38998105
http://www.people-press.org/2016/09/13/2-party-affiliation-among-voters-1992-2016/

http://www.gallup.com/poll/172439/party-identification-varies-widely-across-age-spectrum.aspx

sorry on phone can't just post the pic

>>38997655
Free speech means opinions and words can't be criminalized. It doesn't mean no social consequences.

>>38998162
This still isn't right. This is very not right

Just move to other websites, most popular gun channels already moved to Full30.

>>38996008
>Government made a ruling saying that since this organization is so huge, and not like a white supremacist group or something, they have to abide by constitutional laws for equality
And that's not a good thing, it's pure government intervention in private affairs.

>>38998162
Interesting. So if I made a hugely popular site but shadowbanned all niggers and this was understood by all to be unspoken policy it's be totally fine because muh consequences?

>>38997460
It's on YT's blog. Inappropriate content featuring Family Entertainment characters is blocked by adsense.

>>38998182
There are websites that ban women, or men. That would be no different.

>>38995537
Youtube is a lot more than just a website. It's an edge provider. They maintain their own servers containing all their videos installed at ISP's all around the world to make streaming easier and consume less bandwidth. To make another youtube you'd need significant amounts of infrastructure and that takes a lot of workers and a lot of money.

First of all, if you think Google has any other motive to do anything than to maximize profits, you have an awfully optimistic view of corporations.

More importantly, people have only themselves to blame. Internet is by definition a decentralized system. Nobody is stopping you from renting a VPS and hosting anything legal on it. But lazy fucks who can't handle themselves without walled gardens and handholding centralized everything in the hands of a few people. Now you act surprised when you don't get a say in how the big websites are run? How naive are you? Why WOULD they listen to you when you start acting in a way that's bad for business?

The internet was great for a while, and it could have been continued to be great, but it was ruined by lazy normalfags.

>>38998162
That's not how the term "free speech" has been used throughout history. Mill, in his book On Liberty (pretty fucking important book if you're talking about the freedom of speech, by the way), specifically says:

>Society can and does execute its own mandates: and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with which it ought not to meddle, it practises a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself. Protection, therefore, against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough: there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling; against the tendency of society to impose, by other means than civil penalties, its own ideas and practices as rules of conduct on those who dissent from them; to fetter the development, and, if possible, prevent the formation, of any individuality not in harmony with its ways, and compel all characters to fashion themselves upon the model of its own.

File: 1455977007632.png (67KB, 331x317px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 331x317px

>>38995537
This is what you get for giving corporations the same rights has human beans.

>>38996518
FB is arguably more cancerous than Google

>>38998196
Link it i can't be arsed searching for it pls lad also my point was that youtube is very weird about what it see as ad un friendly.

>>38998210
>The internet was great for a while, and it could have been continued to be great, but it was ruined by lazy normalfags.
THIS!

>>38998239
It really is, Google at least allows for some anonymity

>>38998204
Youtube is a fucking monopoly. More people watch it than watch television!

File: almonds.gif (841KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

841KB, 800x800px

Google
google censorship notice anything right at the top
also click news always gif very related

>>38998266
There are other websites, and you can always create your own.

>>38998284
They really seem to be covering their tracks. Wasn't their notice "Don't be evil"

File: 1501645341881.png (93KB, 467x496px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 467x496px

>>38998284
holy fucking shit
who dat fuck has heard of quartz
/pol/ and /leftypol/ are both right on google wtf

>>38998317
/leftypol/ is not right on anything

>>38998317
What quartz?

File: a14.jpg (23KB, 394x458px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 394x458px

>>38998284
Like pottery
bet they are lurking right now

File: 1473489111059.png (264KB, 820x826px) Image search: [Google]

264KB, 820x826px

youtube is a private corporation, they can do whatever they want with their website :-)))))

>>38998209
And because of that infrastructure, they have a hard time making money. It costs Alphabet around $4 billion/yr to maintain YouTube. Couple that with the fact that they could stand to lose almost $1 billion from advertisers pulling out over their ads being displayed before "extremist" videos, and it's understandable why YT is doing what they're doing.

>>38998331
google
google censorship
>>38998330
I agree but on google being a evil all knowing company they are right and so is /pol/.

File: TracerTong_infolink.jpg (4KB, 150x150px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 150x150px

>>38995537
>the more power you think you have, the more quickly it slips from your hands

They censorship leftwing people too.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/08/09/google-censors-block-access-to-counterpunch-and-other-progressive-sites/

File: When the NAP is violated.jpg (1500955231618).jpg (107KB, 800x650px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 800x650px

>>38998284
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Google
Hmm... Apparently most of it is related to nanny-state laws and Google complying with government requests. Really makes you think...

>>38995927
>Blames it on politics when ad providers pulling out is the obvious cause

>>38998284
The quartz article implies google is scared of us.

Like afraid of ISIS levels scared. Interesting

>>38998454
>us
Also please stop with your unwarranted self-importance, it's repulsive

File: 1501719577834.jpg (144KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 500x500px

>>38998454
>>38998454
Not even alt-right just like being a naughty boy on the interwebs.

>>38998472
>>38998484
No but seriously, they were all afraid of a bomb threat or something

Google canceled a town-hall meeting for its 60,000 employees at the last minute on Aug. 10, citing concerns for their safety, after the names of some staff were leaked to right-wing sites.

Why is it so hard to accept that youtube can do what it wants in terms of removing or censoring content? If anything, all these decisions are going to do is incentivize competitor websites to try and take that said audience. And regardless of what kind of ideology is actually being said, it is hard for advertisers to justify putting their ads on a site that very well could place it on a video on alt-right topics. Not even so that the advertisers are hard left or anything, just that alt-right has a controversial public image right now and anything controversial advertisers want to stay away from. If you genuinely think this is some dystopian future shit you need to go read up on how business actually works instead of spouting bullshit. There's other things going on right now in real life that are much more similar to a dystopian future and it's really terrifying.

>>38998567
What's so similar to a dystopian future than the censorship of the US's primary Media and TV outlet rolled up in a beautiful internet joint?

>>38998595
Most regular people don't get their news primarily from youtube, are you fucking kidding me?

File: 1499267865350.png (61KB, 658x662px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 658x662px

>>38998551
hahahahahaha
and robots still hate /pol/ even though they terrorize the normie scum i hate what this board has become fucking tumblr 2.0.

>>38998625
/r9k/ is anti-politics. The only important issues are feminism and sex robots. For that matter we hate /leftypol/ too

>>38998595
I'd say that shit like the UK police knocking your door down for criticizing Islam is a little bit more dystopian than a company that survives on advertisements responding to an advertiser boycott.

>>38998625
I am a 65 year old guy. I started here about a year ago and lurk on both 4 and 8 chan. I told my 32 yo son about the chans. His comment was holy fuck dad that's the darkest place on the internet. Told him to grow the fuck up. He changed the subject lol

Once the election was over I asked my 20 y/o son, "so, what exactly is a meme?" lol I was not a redditor yet. At the time I wasn't even aware that this was a movement, that so many others believed, just as I do, that our geotus is here to turn the tables on the globalist cucks. My mind has been blown. Praise Kek!

File: 1501548737528.jpg (68KB, 1236x644px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 1236x644px

>>38998657
>feminism
is very politcal didn't we used to hate non trap gay's to how we have changed
>>38998688
i dunno if i want to be a meme poster or real

>Why don't you make your own site? o wait, that'd require some IRL skill.
Or just pay someone a $100 to set it up for you. Or use vimeo/dailymotion/some other video sharing site.

I don't really care enough about alt-memers to actually give a shit

>>38995537
the media will probably always favor the more sensitive sides of content creators, its why you'll probably never see someone like papa franku in a youtube rewind

File: 1488573224645.png (1MB, 1080x1425px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1080x1425px

>>38995902
lol its fucked in the head when its reached this level

>>38999690
fuck those rewind things,i dont even watch those shitshows and i encourage other not to even give em a single view

>>38995957
yeah but for some reason I don't really see another video hosting site garnering as much traction as a long running monopolized video streaming conglomerate like utube

>>38996082
I like this idea, where do we start? :)

>>38998068
https://www.google.pl/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/09/white-voters-victory-donald-trump-exit-polls

>Of the one in three Americans who earn less than $50,000 a year, a majority voted for Clinton. A majority of those who earn more backed Trump.

You're basically writing a lot of words about how smart you are, and how you are le master of marketing, but don't provide a single source for your claims

>>38996933
yes, welcome to capitalism

>>38995902
>left-wing establishment
>liberalism
imblying

>>38999866
Yes, progressives (popularly known in America as "liberals") are now left-wing. We don't live in the 60s anymore, communism is no longer a relevant political movement. The political compass has shifted towards the right.

File: 1466910715693.jpg (186KB, 600x412px) Image search: [Google]

186KB, 600x412px

>>38996008
No, it was the same reason why companies can't discriminate. If you take any form of government funding/subsidies you must abide by their rules. So unless you want to be paying exorbitant and complicated taxes as an organization, you will follow government rules.

>>38999747
they are the exact thing that is wrong with youtube, taking good things that are home produced and turning them into corporate shill cringefests

>>38998007
Economically, not politically. New generation is overwhelmingly liberal on social issues. Every major show that is aired today is very much liberal on social issues, every big website with user-generated content is socially liberal when it comes to teenagers, most modern social movements are liberal. Just remember the recent Pepsi ad. I'm pretty sure when it comes to marketing and market analysis, soft drinks are king. Or pride parade ads that every major company has.

>>38999937
>communism is no longer a relevant political movement
www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/wonk/wp/2016/04/26/a-majority-of-millennials-now-reject-capitalism-poll-shows/

>>39000167
It's the millenials who are spending money, not the new generation who are being raised by millennials. So what if some shithead highschooler shits his panties over pepsi commercials, he's still drinking mountain dew that the parents buy.

>>39000318
Generation Y are socially liberal too and they're a juicy demographic when it comes to disposable income.

>>39000282
>implying any millennials actually understand communism to any meaningful degree

>>39000468
Well, it's safe to assume those who are critical of capitalism are more likely to be find of hardcore gommunizm than not.

File: nico.jpg (32KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 480x480px

I'm not entirely sure if would work at all, but can't those guys move to another video sharing site like Dailymotion? I can see their fans going to watch videos on that site for them.
Only issue I see would be the fact that they won't get money from Google, but then again I don't see why someone would be entirely dependent on Youtube cash or why they'd still want money from Google after what recently happened.

>>39000531
*Fond
Original correction

>>39000531
I'd say it's far more likely they're just lacking fulfillment in life and use (their poor understanding of) capitalism as a scapegoat for their problems without having any idea what the alternatives entail.

>>39000531
Only appealing factor that would actually happen for them is whacking boomers before they get whacked for going to college.

>>39000570
Political decisions are not made entirely from material conditions (or inadequacies). If you find economic and social inequality unjust, chances that you completely switch your position are pretty slim. And when you're more fond of socialism than capitalism, I think it's obvious in what direction the change could occur.

File: f21025a7.jpg (92KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 800x800px

>>39000814
Have you ever had a conversation with an actual human?

>>39000901
I have already shown statistical prevalence of anti-capitalism and you decided to switch from mental gymnastics to non-arguments. That's weak.

File: 1835787622.jpg (61KB, 600x582px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 600x582px

>>39001013
>already shown statistical prevalence

>>38997706
Meanwhile, if you speak the truth to leftards you get fired from your job. Are you for real?

File: f1f6df48dd32275da37919d11188ff34c1f84cb7_hq.jpg (57KB, 447x596px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 447x596px

No one's channel has been banned yet, why do you care?
These right wing channels which have all caps titles and arrows and stuff are just playing this for views. It's like when they killed the fucking dog in family guy and he came back in a few episodes. It's manufactured controversy because some creepy guy broke company policy and was fired.

also right wing capitalists getting mad because capitalism threatens their livelihood and platform lol

File: 1501174694833.png (456KB, 652x604px) Image search: [Google]

456KB, 652x604px

>>38995537
jesus christ youtube shouldnt have allowed video monetization in the first place (they could have still run ads and made the money off of them)
if people didn't believe being a youtuber could be a "job" we wouldn't have to deal with this cringefest from both left and right

File: angry joe.jpg (42KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 1280x720px

>>39001786
They can't operate without your money anon!

>>38997655
So the owners of companies aren't free to decide who does and doesn't get to use their company? I should be able to walk in to Walmart, stand up on one of the cash registers and start yelling about how the Jews are the reason I'm a virgin?

File: jet jaguar.jpg (12KB, 667x268px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 667x268px

>>39002067
It won't be a public nuisance which would disturb everyone on that site anon.

File: 3c2de06d88c2278e3d9bd1b0750d9d81.jpg (143KB, 500x749px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 500x749px

>>39002381
Do you think book publishers should be FORCED to publish every book that is sent to them, without any sort of vetting?

>>39000167
Jesus fuck that advertisement.

It's like full metal hippie

>>39002933
when their service is advertised as "we'll publish everyone's books so anyone can read them!" and the name is reminiscent of that, then any attempt to restrict book publishing based on politics should absolutely be criticized

>>39003037
Well this company specifies, in their ToS, in which situations they can terminate publishing for your book.