Youtube completely censor Rogan x Trump Podcast

[Consept]

@Average Actualizer Genuine question, what do you think about Elon Musk censoring people on X that he disagrees with and also doing the sweepstakes thing offering people a chance to win money if they vote? 

 

[Average Actualizer]

1 hour ago, Consept said:

@Average Actualizer Genuine question, what do you think about Elon Musk censoring people on X that he disagrees with and also doing the sweepstakes thing offering people a chance to win money if they vote? 

 

Both are bad things, Elon shouldn't be biased and should allow people that he disagrees with no matter what and he shouldn't do those "donations". But still twitter has less censorship than any other major social media platform so i appreciate that.

[Average Actualizer]

6 hours ago, Joshe said:

You an expert on search algorithms and YouTube’s handling of keyword combos? This reminds me of that time right wingers thought Wayfair was selling kids on their website due to a database malfunction. Ashley for $8,000. 

You're in denial if you think the video wasn't censored, stuff like this is so annoying to read, you know it was censored, i know it was censored, but you still choose to intentionally be in denial, i'm very often suprised how much people get sucked in by the tribalism of politics that they will deny the most obvious corruption of their side just because it's their "team", it reminds me of sports fans, please be honest man.

[Average Actualizer]

2 hours ago, voxun said:

When I search Joe Rogan Trump its the first result .🤷

Yes now it is, they "fixed" it.

[DocWatts]

YouTube has had a longstanding policy of demonitizing and delisting videos for controversial topics that aren't palatable to advertisers (meaning they're on the site, but they won't show up in your Recommended feed). I've seen vids on topics such as suicide and the Holocaust get delisted. Ever notice a video title with 'N*zi' instead of 'Nazi' in the title? That's that the algorithm at work.

Little surprise if Rogan's three hour pow-wow with a rapist who launched a violent coup against our government is deemed 'controversial' by the algorithm.

Edited 13 hours ago by DocWatts

[Average Actualizer]

7 minutes ago, DocWatts said:

YouTube has had a longstanding policy of demonitizing and delisting videos for controversial topics that aren't palatable to advertisers (meaning they're on the site, but they won't show up in your Recommended feed). I've seen vids on topics such as suicide and the Holocaust get delisted. Ever notice a video title with 'N*zi' instead of 'Nazi' in the title? That's that the algorithm at work.

Little surprise if Rogan's three hour pow-wow with a rapist who launched a violent coup against our government is deemed 'controversial' by the algorithm.

The content of the interview itself is not comparable to the things you mentioned, if you want to talk about the person being interviewed then for example why is every Diddy song still not censored, let alone completely banned from the site? Considering the person who made those songs is a much more controversial figure than Trump.

[Consept]

2 hours ago, Average Actualizer said:

Both are bad things, Elon shouldn't be biased and should allow people that he disagrees with no matter what and he shouldn't do those "donations". But still twitter has less censorship than any other major social media platform so i appreciate that.

It has less censorship depending on what you say, if you were tweeting about how bad Teslas were all day you'd definitely get banned. That's not so much the case with youtube, you can definitely critisize the platform without getting banned. 

Also regulations on a platform are not bad, it's just they need to be fair across the bad. There should of course be regulations that act to keep a platform safe and there should be regulations against bots or misinformation and disinformation. This site were on now would be terrible without any regulation. A lot of people are running away from X because of how it's being run, so the experiment of taking a successful platform and reducing regulations has not worked. 

[BlueOak]

My comments have been shadow-banned on youtube for 10 years. Its a platform that is heavily regulated.

[BlueOak]

2 hours ago, Average Actualizer said:

Both are bad things, Elon shouldn't be biased and should allow people that he disagrees with no matter what and he shouldn't do those "donations". But still twitter has less censorship than any other major social media platform so i appreciate that.

For you because you align more with his views. I wouldn't get a single comment out. 

[Joshe]

2 hours ago, Average Actualizer said:

You're in denial if you think the video wasn't censored, stuff like this is so annoying to read, you know it was censored, i know it was censored, but you still choose to intentionally be in denial, i'm very often suprised how much people get sucked in by the tribalism of politics that they will deny the most obvious corruption of their side just because it's their "team", it reminds me of sports fans, please be honest man.

I am being honest. I actually do not know that it was censored. Do I find it odd that if you type in "trump rogan" or "rogan trump" that it wouldn't show up in the top spot? Yes I do. I would expect that query to return the interview in the top spot, but I don't pretend to know the intricacies of how YT handles that, especially with content that was just released. How much time does it take for their algorithm to adjust? Designing search for billions of people and returning results based on thousands of parameters is a complicated thing. I've never studied it, and the only evidence I have that it was censored is "that's odd, it should be in the top spot".

Can you walk us through the technical details of how you know this to be fact and not just your speculation? 

Also, Rogan himself went on X and said there was no problem with YT. 

Edited 12 hours ago by Joshe

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, DocWatts said:

Little surprise if Rogan's three hour pow-wow with a rapist who launched a violent coup against our government is deemed 'controversial' by the algorithm.

Good point.

[What Am I]

1 hour ago, Joshe said:

I am being honest. I actually do not know that it was censored. Do I find it odd that if you type in "trump rogan" or "rogan trump" that it wouldn't show up in the top spot? Yes I do. I would expect that query to return the interview in the top spot, but I don't pretend to know the intricacies of how YT handles that, especially with content that was just released. How much time does it take for their algorithm to adjust? Designing search for billions of people and returning results based on thousands of parameters is a complicated thing. I've never studied it, and the only evidence I have that it was censored is "that's odd, it should be in the top spot".

From working in tech, this is my steel man argument as to what may be happening. Though at the same time, YT is ran by humans, and I wouldn't put it past humans to bend circumstances to their own advantage. As you say, the truth is hidden behind an opaque screen, and all we really have is the fact that it's not currently easy to search for.

I suppose when a new episode comes out, someone can test if it can be found by searching the names of Rogan and the guest.

Edited 10 hours ago by What Am I

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, What Am I said:

Though at the same time, YT is ran by humans, and I wouldn't put it past humans to bend circumstances to their own advantage. As you say, the truth is hidden behind an opaque screen, and all we really have is the fact that it's not currently easy to search for.

It's totally possible they censored it and I wouldn't be surprised if they did, but you can't go around saying it's a fact unless you actually know. This careless thinking is probably the #1 cause of delusion. Do it 10,000 times and see where it takes you. Falsehood has a cost. 

[What Am I]

8 minutes ago, Joshe said:

It's totally possible they censored it and I wouldn't be surprised if they did, but you can't go around saying it's a fact unless you actually know. This careless thinking is probably the #1 cause of delusion. Do it 10,000 times and see where it takes you. Falsehood has a cost. 

Yeah, stating it as a cold hard fact can be a dangerous game. If the argument is instead made with an appropriate amount of qualifiers and nuance, it'd probably end up being more useful towards an effort in understanding the truth.

Edited 8 hours ago by What Am I

[Consept]

Thinking about it, it's not that crazy that it doesn't come out top for 'rogan trump', it comes out top for lots of search terms like 'rogan trump interview'. If it was being suppressed it shouldn't show up for any searches, but just putting their 2 names is quite indirect. I'm not saying it's impossible that it could be suppressed but it's not really obvious to me. Also we don't know exactly how the algorithm works, there could be lots of reasons why it doesn't show up for that particular term 

[Average Actualizer]

4 hours ago, Consept said:

It has less censorship depending on what you say, if you were tweeting about how bad Teslas were all day you'd definitely get banned. That's not so much the case with youtube, you can definitely critisize the platform without getting banned. 

Also regulations on a platform are not bad, it's just they need to be fair across the bad. There should of course be regulations that act to keep a platform safe and there should be regulations against bots or misinformation and disinformation. This site were on now would be terrible without any regulation. A lot of people are running away from X because of how it's being run, so the experiment of taking a successful platform and reducing regulations has not worked. 

You won't get banned if you tweet how bad Teslas are. Yes youtube won't ban you if you critisize them either but there are things on youtube you can't critisize unlike on twitter where it's more free even tho twitter has biased restrictions too.

I don't think that the experiment failed really, the people who are running away from twitter are mostly leftists and they run away because they get to face the right talking to them now, before Musk there were no right-aligned viewes on twitter and if there were they were basically supressed, it was a left echo-chamber, for me twitter is better than ever before (other than bots and porn that gets spammed, but if you don't interact with those types of posts they stop showing up). And you could say that twitter is now a right echo-chamber (even tho i would disagree because i don't think the left gets censored now nowhere near as much as right did before Musk) but even if that was true it would just balance other major social media platforms that are left echo chambers, like Instagram, Youtube and Facebook.

[Average Actualizer]

4 hours ago, BlueOak said:

My comments have been shadow-banned on youtube for 10 years. Its a platform that is heavily regulated.

True, especially over the past year, my comments would literally be censored for no reason, you could wish someone a happy birthday and get censored, seems like everyone is having this problem, it's unfortunate that youtube is destroying itself like this.

[Average Actualizer]

4 hours ago, BlueOak said:

For you because you align more with his views. I wouldn't get a single comment out. 

I used to have twitter before and after Musk and i never got banned because i wouldn't really say anything that could go against the bias of the site at the time, so i can't really say, i mean twitter is definitely right-leaning now but the leftist can still talk with more freedom that the right could before Musk, so i don't think that the left has it that bad anymore, it's just not a left echo-chamber now.

[Average Actualizer]

4 hours ago, Joshe said:

I am being honest. I actually do not know that it was censored. Do I find it odd that if you type in "trump rogan" or "rogan trump" that it wouldn't show up in the top spot? Yes I do. I would expect that query to return the interview in the top spot, but I don't pretend to know the intricacies of how YT handles that, especially with content that was just released. How much time does it take for their algorithm to adjust? Designing search for billions of people and returning results based on thousands of parameters is a complicated thing. I've never studied it, and the only evidence I have that it was censored is "that's odd, it should be in the top spot".

Can you walk us through the technical details of how you know this to be fact and not just your speculation? 

Also, Rogan himself went on X and said there was no problem with YT. 

It's not the problem that it didn't show up in the top spot (which would also be a problem considering it got 30 million views under 3 days, so it wouldn't make sense), the problem is it wouldn't show up at all, you could scroll for who knows how long and you wouldn't find it, i was scrolling for like 1 minute and then stopped cause it was pointless, who knows if it even showed up at all at any point. 

If the algorithm can adjust to the reactions from the media and people on that interview then why wouldn't it adjust to the interview itself, that has by far more views than any other video releated to the topic? Imagine you search "Actualized.org" on YT and you get every single reaction and review of Leo's channel instead of the channel itself, that's the equivalent of what happend yesterday.

The Rogan post that you're talking about was about the initial release when the video was unlisted, this was done by Rogan and not YT because Rogan had some technical problems with it, the censorship that i'm talking about happend yesterday throughout most of the day and then stopped at the evening when most of twitter including Musk and Rogan complained, Rogan initially did it with a retweet of another tweet that talked about the problem and then tweeted about it himself, here is Rogan's tweet about that problem: 

https://x.com/joerogan/status/1851117181964046431

[Average Actualizer]

3 hours ago, What Am I said:

From working in tech, this is my steel man argument as to what may be happening. Though at the same time, YT is ran by humans, and I wouldn't put it past humans to bend circumstances to their own advantage. As you say, the truth is hidden behind an opaque screen, and all we really have is the fact that it's not currently easy to search for.

I suppose when a new episode comes out, someone can test if it can be found by searching the names of Rogan and the guest.

Now it's pretty easy to find, they fixed the problem yesterday, but yesterday it was practically impossible to find it unless you searched for Joe's channel and then clicked on the video or literally typed out the title of the video letter by letter.

I think people in this thread are missing the point that i wrote that you would literally get every single reaction to the video from the media and the people (and those reactions are mostly left-leaning) instead of getting the actual video itself, there is no excuse for this, this wasn't the problem of the algorithm, the only logical reasoning that i heard is that video could've been mass reported by the left, but even in a case like that it would be illogical for Youtube to censor it considering the reaction was massively positive when considering the views, likes and comments that it got.