| saistošuma algoritmi |
[Jan. 11th, 2020|11:57 am] |
kratu sirdi citur internātā par 'saistošuma algoritmiem'; angliski nevis latviski, tāpēc nav pelnījis nebūt aiz griezuma (Latvija #1, Ķīna #2!)
vienā vārdā ir drukas kļūda, bet pamanot neizlaboju un vairs neatrodu, tāpēc tā tur vēl ir
The degree to which [right-wing content being favored] is engagement algorithm driven can't be understated, and not just in YouTube, but in other platforms like Twitter as well. The algorithms are designed to capture as much attention as possible, as broadly as possible, which naturally creates a race to the bottom. Substantive content is self-limiting in that consuming it is more like work; meanwhile, the sargons and shapiros have next to no bar of entrance, and they can also just shit out content on the daily.
On top of that, the type of content right-wing grifters (sad that this word isn't in the lexicon enough that Chrome's spellcheck wouldn't nag about it) do is outrage porn, which strongly hooks into people's biases. It's ginned up as intellectualism because appearing intelligent is a marketable trait, so shortcuts to it are very desired.
Then, on top of that still, the outrage porn they do is not constrained by reality; they're free to use "alternative facts" and whatever shitty logic, and calling this out falls under "false news", which parallels how religious people are conditioned to have faith.
On top even of that, platforms like Facebook allow micro-targeting people susceptible to this type of thinking, just to get the ball rolling (a recent technological development that's contributed to the current resurgence of the right). Centrists like Joe Rogan enable it by keenly platforming the grifters because of how enlightened and Voltaire-like it makes them feel to stand for abstract purism over having to actually think about what impact their actions have.
I'm not trying to be ridiculous by inflating the list, but there's also the fact that actually having principles entails self-criticism, but across groups this means a level of disunity (the memed about left unity).
Add to that the moneyed interests (symbolized by the Kochs) that support right-wing propaganda, and that their supposed powerful opposites like the demonized Soros or big silicon valley tech companies are still economically right, so not really that opposite. They've also used their economic power to capture a lot of mass media, the symbol of this capture being Murdoch.
I may actually have left out something else important contributing to how the right can be dominant in some ways, like expressed in the engagement algorithms favoring them, but the opposing ideas (BreadTube content creators in this case) still being competitive is a testament to them as ideas instead of manipulation techniques. There's an underlying reason why authoritarians can't get rid of all opposition (except temporarily in totalitarianism, until it collapses because its model of reality is a room of mirrors), and it isn't a conspiracy (as they hilariously try to claim) or the insipid centrist idea that there must always be two valid sides (or worse yet, that picking a side at random or unthinkingly would be valid, like in sports).
In the unlikely event that someone reads this comment, and if they're not left but center or right, they'd be twitching in their seat to point out that there are left authoritarians and right libertarians too, and it's a valid point, but not in the way the want it to be. One thing that it says is that tankies are shitty because they give cover to right authoritarians because "the other side does it too". The other is that capitalism inherently has an imbalance of power, making it (and by extension the center or right) inherently authoritarian to a degree. This at least validates the anti-capitalist part of left ideology, but still leaves implementation as an open question, which is the most valid argument someone for the status quo could make (and so is an important conversation to have, but unfortunately the focus on it is usually stolen by confusion about basic terms, promoted in bad faith by current special interests).
Then there are the more inane arguments like referring to "human nature" (which shouldn't require much comment) or some form of trickle down apology about capitalism lifting out people of poverty. The trickle down term is particularly salient, because it shows that this ideology can't survive scrutiny, but admitting trickle down being inherent in capitalism would be admitting that it's discredited, so they've tried to get rid of the term but keep the idea.
The really sad part in all of this is that the authoritarian energy that gets stoked by the algorithmic overlords at the big tech firms needs to go somewhere; in the best case it's dissipated somehow (and no, I'm not talking about gulags, tankies are shitty people) and in the worst case more of the world goes the way of Weimar republic.
Apologies if anyone actually did read; I may have gone into cringe copypasta territory, especially since the topic is BreadTube, but I've expanded so much to be one step away from ranting about Adam and Eve, so posting with an alt. |
|
|
