Posted on 06/29/2020 4:45:37 PM PDT by janetjanet998
Restraint of trade - entities on both the left and right profit from using Youtube...
If I let Timmy and Sally each set up lemonade stands on my front yard and then kick Timmy off when I find him pissing in my pool, am I restraining trade?
“The techs have been walking a fine line, leaving as much stuff out there as possible while still appeasing the advertisers.”
—
Yeah, “fine line” - that’s the ticket!:
Facebook Content Moderator: “If Someone’s Wearing MAGA Hat, I’m Going to Delete Them for Terrorism”
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/06/23/facebook_content_moderator_if_someones_wearing_maga_hat_im_going_to_delete_them_for_terrorism.html
YouTube takes a cut of the monetized video.
He pays them through add review and for an account that loads “X” megabytes a month of content.
They make piles of money from the creators. Through their monopoly.
> Although, this is not a free market anymore. They control it all, and they know it. <
Right! We’re talking monopolies here.
“If I let Timmy and Sally each set up lemonade stands on my front yard and then kick Timmy off when I find him pissing in my pool, am I restraining trade?”
—
That’s an incredibly silly and desperate grasping at straws, totally divorced from any reality. Try coming up with something that involves two parties where both are making a profit from their interactivity and no crime has been committed (as in the reality discussed here)- if you can. Good luck.
Say what?
You mean beyond just placing ads on their videos?
If so he'll have a case against them for breach of contract. I'm not holding my breath.
Are lemonade stands platforms? I will say in your case, they certainly are straw men.
Say what?
You mean beyond just placing ads on their videos?
Yes...many youtubers make money from donations from their viewers...youtube gets a 30% cut
The freeeeeeee market will figure it out. Who cares if big corporation monopolies snuff out our access to freely express our ideas to millions in an election year. The constitution is aliiiive and welllllll.
You left out a pretty important element. They're using someone else's private property to make their profit and they're using it at the property owner's pleasure.
Does restraint of trade as a concept only apply to platforms?
At this point I don’t care what the reasoning is behind their censorship. Whether it’s personal distaste for conservatives or advertisers threatening business.
Conservative businesses have a laundry it of things they cannot discriminate against without facing lawsuits. These media giants AND their advertisers seem to have free-reign to intimidate as they see fit. Your ‘Free market” arguements are increasingly unappealing to the side that is getting treated in such a lopsided manner.
You know as well as I do that these businesses could be culled by government if it wished. The only thing lacking is the will. Well, I want to see that will. It’s not impossible if conservatives merely get as nasty as the Left. Start prosecuting both the tech giants AND the advertisers. HArrass them, shop around for judges, threaten audits, whatever it takes. Treat them just as the Left treats the political right. But above all just do it.
How many billions do you think they’ve invested in their technology?
Do you think Stefan has a right to use it for his benefit?
Less than the billions of dollars Youtube made from ads on videos stolen from the rightful copyright holders. You seem blissfully unaware of the ugly history of Youtube.
Do you think Youtube/Google had a right to build their business on stolen copyrighted material?
You need to wake the hell up! Big fat corporate media is smothering our constitution if only one side can reach billions of people and particulary during an election year, there is simply no point to having a constitution. Wake up. It is time to fight or watch it all go under.
“You mean beyond just placing ads on their videos?
If so he’ll have a case against them for breach of contract. I’m not holding my breath.”
—
The info I got says -
“YouTube creators earn money from advertisements that air alongside their YouTube videos. They only get paid when viewers watch in full, click on, or otherwise interact with the ads. Google takes a cut of the earnings, as part of the YouTube Partner Program’s revenue-sharing model.”
So, Google (Youtube) gets the ad money and takes its cut. Without the content, they would have no place to put ads and be out of business. Also, Youtube is very often strongly integrated in online personalities/entities other promotional & money making ventures.
The Corporations ARE the Government!
And what else does in say in their terms of service about their control of what they think is appropriate content?
Both sides benefit as long as both sides play by the rules, but the fact is the YouTube platform is private property and they control what gets carried.
So then, if the electric company doesn’t agree with your political views, they can deny you service?
These tech giants are utilities at this point in my opinion.
If the techs are doing something illegal, sue them.
If not it's just whining.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.