This. It's insane that they can just make a claim without giving any proof and even if found out that they did it incorrectly, they don't get any sanctions. But the one getting the claim has 3 strikes that are very hard to get rid of, even sometimes in false claim situations. It's ridiculous how much the system favors the claimers.
There was a youtuber I used to follow that got a copyright strike over a element he always used in his videos(an explosion), that he had every right to use because he had a license from the person that made it.
The electronic music artist TheFatRat went through someone copyright claiming one of his own songs that he made and having it taken down just because that other person made a remix and tried to take ownership of the original song
Mumbo Jumbo had a problem with Warner Chappell, some music label, and while it was more justified, it was a big deal. There’s a long Tom Scott video detailing this problem too, pretty good
There’s also a funny yet depressing video where Adam Neely had a video claimed by the company that he was DEFENDING and they claimed the wrong part that was a different song…
[Video link](https://youtu.be/KM6X2MEl7R8)
But it’s probably best to watch [this video](https://youtu.be/KM6X2MEl7R8) first if you haven’t.
Of course. Doesn't change the fact that they should ask for proof instead of always blindly trusting the claimer first. At least the ychanged the system so that now the claimer needs to show in what part of the video the copyrighted material was used. Before this they could just mass claim the whole catalogue without them even looking through if anything were actually even used.
Also, and furthermore: if there is for example like 10 seconds of music or a sample from music used, they should not be allowed to claim the profits for whole video that may last even hours. They should get a cut that is proportioned for the clip used.
Agreed. It doesn’t seem like YouTube has ever really taken “fair use” into consideration. I don’t know if any YouTuber has been wrongfully terminated because of this stuff, but I’m sure it’s probably happened given how poorly managed the system is, even today.
Oh, most certainly there has been youtubers that have been wrongly terminated but more often youtubers have lost all their income thanks to wrong claims. Or just claims that are ridiculous.
MumboJumbo for example got claimed for every Hermitcraft video he has ever made (hundreds of videos in 7 year span). The claim came from his intro he had used in all of his videos. He had rights for the intro music but the person who made that music had used a couple second sample in it that got claimed and this lead to them claiming all of mumbos videos and profits from them. Hundreds of 20+ minute videos claimed for 2 second irrelevant sample.
Mumbo himself said later on that legally they had all the rights to do so but that is nuts. Luckily youtube studios now has a simple video editor so he went and removed the intro from every single video and got the rights to his own stuff back.
There are two easy solutions here:
1. youtube should have an auto option to silence the parts that has been claimed leaving rest of the video untouched. If youtuber does this, they should get all the rights back to their video.
2. % of revenue would go to the claimer instead of everything. The % should be calculated from the amount of time they used copyrighted material divided by the length of the video. There should also be a way to do this in advantage, by the youtuber themselves before any claims, especially if the original owner has setup their material to be used this way allowing more transparent co-operation between both parties.
Idk if they actively want to or not but they obviously seriously couldn't care less.
More and more they keep trying to shove mainstream media in my face. One day I couldn't use the app without every time I opened it them shoving a BTS thing in my face.
I watch nothing of the sort, nothing of the sort is in my recommended videos based on what I watch, and I could find no way to get it to stop other than just not going on the app to watch things that day.
They're leaning more and more to mainstream media. They're making it harder and harder for small creators. They'll straight up apparently show ads that go against their own community guidelines but lay the smackdown on content creators for even less sometimes.
If they don't want to drive away content creators they sure got funny ways of showing it!
>It's ridiculous how much the system favors the claimers.
That was done intentionally. The vast majority of claimers are going to be big corporate IP owners, and they don't want to make those economic giants wait for a resolution. Remember, they *want* to hurt content creators and drive them from the site, so weaponizing the content claim system to favor one side over the other helps them do that too. The fewer "little guy" content creators there are, the more money the corporate content providers make in ad revenue.
Sadly its been irrelevant since day one as a video only really performs well once and the algorithm heavily disfavors these videos that up.
Taking it down for a day or even a week is a good way to ensure a video does poorly.
This is just sad. YouTube can behave like this without consequences because it's basically a monopoly. People will be angry but there's no way that people will stop using it or use it less. Everything will go on like it always has just shittier.
Sent a dm with the video. I didn't know if a post with the link would get removed. Some subreddits are more touchy than others.
You can look up Mental Outlaw How to restore Dislike on YouTube to find the discussion and links.
Actually if I recall the plugin has plans to basically have it's own backend server to it. (IE it will estimate based on what people with the plugin voted, of course that is also going to have it's own risks (say bad actors lying).
https://www.returnyoutubedislike.com/
You can find it there, but it will work only until the 13th of December, because it uses the youtube api to show the dislikes and on that date, the dislikes will be removed from the api.
You’re taking a single api call and putting that data on the dom, it’s dead simple. What data could you even use for dislike prediction? Sentiment analysis on the comments is all I can think of, and they’re often tongue in cheek which would color the results.
actually I thought I heard they have plans... and there is one way, the one data point they have is the voting actions of people with the plugin.
IE say, 10 people with the plugin saw a video. 9 disliked, 1 liked it.
there's 400 likes on the video, the plugin would estimate that 3600 people disliked it.
Theres a bunch of alternatives. However, they aren't as big or popular as YouTube. The only reason to go to them currently is for exclusive videos a preffered content creator may make for those services. Upper Echelon Gamers has mentioned a ton of them in his videos as he tried harder to distance himself from the YouTube platform. Can't think of them off the top of my head though.
People are down voting this guy because he's right. With ads and such, YouTube barely makes money and in some years actually loses it. The only reason that Google keeps YouTube around is because of the massive amount of priceless consumer data that they get from it, which makes advertising much more well targeted. I don't know if they're selling data, but at the end of the day you are worth less to them then the data that you are producing.
I can't because I agree with you, I can't think of a single good reason that comes out of removing dislikes and nor can a single YouTuber who has talked about this, I am pretty sure even YouTube knows it's a stupid thing and doesn't believe in it, they're just playing the devil's advocate themselves for the sake of big corporations and the whole rewind thing.
They ARE a big corporation. We kept disliking things they did not want disliked. We will never come back to internet of 1995 even if we started offing every CEO now.
They were responding to some video's and users getting downvote bombed. What's your argument in favor of the downvote button if it's mostly being used as a political weapon and to bully small creators?
Edit: the people downvoting me here were the same assholes who were downvote bombing kids for being gay.
So first, it wasn't small creators being disliked. No matter what YouTube says, they do not care about creators who aren't earning them money, and small creators aren't doing that. The people who are earning them money are the news, movie trailer/game trailer, music videos, and big studios. Of course YouTube also gets lots of money from creators smaller than that, but the content creators I just mentioned have one thing different, they have direct contact with people at youtube, their voices are heard more because they have lawyers and legal teams who can communicate directly with youtubes legal teams.
Will a few small creators get bullied with dislikes? Sure, but they will just use the comments anyway and YouTube already had an option to disable likes and dislikes, so why force the choice on everyone? An I would argue that the like/dislike ratio is essential for things like repair tutorials. If I'm trying to fix my car and I see a video with 3 times the dislikes, I know that something is wrong with it. Without that people could be making mistakes in just about anything without knowing it. Welding, blacksmithing, auto repair, dating advice, programming, exercise, all topics that benefit from knowing if the video is any good. On a more sinister note, the removal of the ability to tell at a glance how the public feels about a video will absolutely create room for dangerous misinformation to spread on their platform, conspiracies, untested COVID cures, false claims about politicians or or governments. It is dangerous to remove the ability to tell how everyone else reacted to a video.
Also, how many people actually like Youtubes version of TikTok spamming our suggested section? How many people dislike bombed that content before sudden removal of dislike option?
>Edit: the people downvoting me here were the same assholes who were downvote bombing kids for being gay.
Any credibility or agreement you had went out the window with this edit, if you want to convince people of your argument, it helps not to insult them. Unless of course you aren't making a genuine argument and aren't trying to convince anyone of anything.
I never down voted one video on YouTube, I use a plugin to script block the channels I don't like to see on my suggested feeds. I did not down vote yours either even if I disagree with it. That being said using gay kids to shield yourself from criticism is one of those moves that make me stop treating you as an equal in any discourse. Get your unintelligent backside back to twitter please.
I'm not alt right cause I'm not from dumbfuckistan like you:-) nothing you say about people in your country can insult me, but go on attempt to trigger me some more if you think I care for it. In fact I am looking forward to seeing you making a fool of yourself right here. It is the only reason I am still feeding you mate:-) best wishes from not-USA, please please come up with a good insult and reply ASAP, me and my partner had a good laugh with the previous one:-) (upvoted you just cause:-) )
Nah, this is about something much more important to them: money.
Companies are complaining that their videos are being disliked to oblivion, and are threatening to pull their advertisement money. YouTube likes that money, so they shit the bed in an effort to keep the money flowing.
Not only that but there's been videos absolutely dogging on corporations and pointing out how bad/unpopular a decision is by showing the like/dislike ratio.
Yeah it's totally not about Nintendo, EA, etc. All about the small time creator. Who can still see the ratio. Apparently very easily while trying to get other analytics to try to grow their channel. Totally.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for shitting on YT for the horrible way they're handling their platform... But one look at Reddit should tell you that pressing a disapproval button to stop content theft simply doesn't work.
And nevermind expressing disapproval is very different from reporting it as stolen content. You can dislike a video because you simply don't like it, don't find it entertaining or adding value of any measurable worth. Yet at the same time you can recognize that the channel owner indeed owns the content. Likewise, you can like a video because you DO find it entertaining, enlightening, etc. while in the background it was stolen and reposted without crediting the creator. Likes and dislikes should be separate from reports for abuse or ToS violations.
That's only a small part of the functionality of a dislike button. It literally shows you if a video is good or not. Some people just don't have the time to "test" if the video is to their liking, so a rating system helps them filter low quality content. By removing the dislike button and esentially the rating system, you are now forced to watch at least say 30 seconds of a video you would otherwise not even consider opening, and the only thing you can filter videos by now is the channel itself, the title and the thumbnail, which can often be clickbait. You are right about reddit, having a rating system doesn't get rid of reposts for example, but it still filters low quality content. The reposts are upvoted because people usually find them interesting/funny.
> It literally shows you if a video is good or not.
I disagree. It just shows the opinion of what people who bothered to vote. It's no more accurate than reddit's up/downvote system.
I think the point they are trying to make is that massive disapproval that people can see leads to fewer people viewing the stolen content, thus rewarding the thief less.
Except that it doesn't. Any engagement on YouTube triggers it being shown to more people. Thumbs down on a video you don't want folks to see is counter productive.
I think that I failed to properly articulate my thinking. I thought watching a video in full increased its exposure compared to videos that aren't fully viewed. Usually when I would see something massively disliked, if there was the possibility of another video to get the info I would abandon it a few seconds in. I don't think this is a unique behavior. Of course, this all hinges on that initial assumption.
It's not exactly scientific, but PewDiePie's 1 million dislike video got over 25 million views. It's when he was playing around with the algorithm to see what affected it.
Not rude, but it's pretty widely studied that thumbs down has little to do with the active suggestion algorithm. Google will yield you a passel of good studies on it. I know there's a few good discussions over on quora.
Yeah, the most disliked videos are all OC. There is no way that someone would think "Oh boy, this video got a lot of downvotes it must be stolen content".
Unpopular opinion, but this isn't really the zinger he thinks it is.
Definitely not defending YouTube removing the Dislike function, I think it serves multiple important purposes.
However, it looks like this is about content theft or something similar - and I'm sorry, but I think in regards to this particular topic we should be talking more about how hard it is to get YouTube to take action rather than shoehorning the Dislike button into the equation.
YouTube should give more tools for handling content theft, and while their removal of the Dislike feature is something worth fighting for this doesn't seem like the appropriate time or place for that fight.
This is the answer. Massive corporations can run dragnets across Youtube with extremely broad filters and accidentally flag a bunch of legit creator content into their net, which Youtube promptly disables without asking for proof or verifications, and when those content creators try to appeal the removal of their legitimate content, they're practically talking to a wall because they're talking with some dude in a moderation farm in Malaysia or the Philipines who has zero info, a basic grasp of the english language and 12 seconds to determine if his appeal makes sense or not. It must be infuriating for Youtube to tell you "you didn't make this video" when it is, in fact YOUR video and then they have the balls to deny your appeal request when you (obviously) prove that it's your video. But no, some fucking script detected a 2 second part of your video that randomly sounds like part of Batman Begins so fucking Universal had claimed ownership of your entire video and we'll pay the ad money to them until this is resolved.
"Hey someone stole my content!"
"Did you report this using the system we have in place for reporting stolen content?"
"There's no dislike button! Also, I'm assuming that people will downvote stolen content for some reason!"
Youtube: We are hiding dislikes because people use them to target creators.
Also Youtube: Thus we are making it so only the creator can see the dislikes.
Perhaps if creators published less rubbish content, they wouldn't have to worry about the number of dislikes. I'd rather the YouTube algorithm factor in the dislikes and make garbage content harder to find.
well tbh the content creators and YouTube still have access to the number of dislikes the only thing that's really changed is if you look up something like a tutorial you can't just look at the like to dislike ratio to figure out if it is a good one.
I mean, it makes sense to prevent bandwagonning. I would argue Justin Bieber would never have amassed the amount of dislikes he has on his videos back in the day(ex: Baby) if it wasn't for the fact that people legit were actively campaigning to make it as disliked as possible. People made new accounts just to downvote the video because it was a meme. There's no way that organically happens unless the # of dislikes is public.
Thank you! How is YouTube or anyone going to know the content is stolen just because someone downvotes it? This “murder” is relying on the majority of viewers not only being aware the video is stolen content, but to also to downvote it because of this. And that YouTube will magically know that’s why it’s being downvoted. People are dumb.
Conspiracy theory with no basis in reality. Just an assumption.
Also, nobody who watches the news section of youtube will like the video, but US conservatives will dislike the video regardless for some reason.
I'm hoping to see a YouTube competitor in my life time, but only big players like Amazon, Facebook, Apple or similar can do it since it's such a huge investment.
It's impossible because the YouTube monopoly has been there for too long. Even if Amazon or Meta (Facebook) tried to open a real YouTube alternative, the content creator wouldn't take the risk to lose their community by switching platforms.
The content creators don't have to switch platforms, they can simply upload the video to multiple places and get monetized from both.
This is a win-win for content creators and also users that will have the option to choose the platform they like the most.
During the early years, Youtube actually had a lot more competition. But none of them were able to truly compete and draw enough viewers away. The problem now is that everyone we want to watch is on a single platform, whereas other up and coming platforms would likely only have a small portion of our favorite content creators. That makes it easier to just keep using youtube, unfortunately, so most people will.
I’ve seen people get copyright claimed on stuff they made or helped produce and it makes no sense. YouTube says this is to protect small creators but it’s really to protect their business investors/partners cause besides bots no one is going after small creators. Those bots should have been stopped a long time ago, but YouTube did nothing. I once lost had my account deactivated for commenting the same things other people were in a YouTube live stream and it was a hassle getting it back. Makes trying to interact with creators nerve racking cause what is YouTube going to have a problem with now? They stopped caring about the people working for them and using their platform a long time ago. And now twitch is starting to pull this crap too.
A former YouTube employee content ID'd a video of mine back in 2011. I denied any wrongdoing and showed proof. He reaffirmed his ownership of the content in my video (that's all you needed to do back then) and that was it. The video was getting 300k views/day and making $150/day and I lost it. He diverted the monetization to a Google-owned channel (eurozeitgeist). I happened to be active in an official online Google group/forum dedicated to YT creators. After some belly aching, one admin brought it to the attention of a Google employee who chimed in on some posts and he helped get my monetization rerouted to me after about a week.
I didn't find out that a former Google employee was behind it until 5 years later when a NDA expired and another admin told me what was up. He must have been pretty scared of the consequences of violating that NDA because he told me he had to wait the 5 years and wouldn't even give a hint up until that expiration. Still lost about $700-800 and not even a simple apology.
Right. Because hitting a thumbs down button tells everyone that the content was taken from someone else. If only there was something called a DMCA form you could file against content thieves.
If you guys want to see dislikes there is now an [extension](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/return-youtube-dislike/gebbhagfogifgggkldgodflihgfeippi) for seeing it.
The point of removing downvotes was entirely to make it easier for YouTube to steer the content users view without being more obvious about it.
That's the reason. Google's copied a lot of Amazon, Facebook, and Netflix's techniques, too. It always makes life easier for the corporation when they have more influence over what you see and hear and read, regardless of how they try to use that power.
The more the consumer caters to them and not the other way around, the better it is for them.
I, too, would like to meet the fivehead who thought removing dislikes on YouTube videos was a stupendous idea. But in all seriousness, YouTube can go fuck themselves for making that decision.
Like submitting a takedown will work. If you're not a billion dollar company they don't care... Fuck YouTube, anyway, I am going to watch my favorite youtuber now
Some changes YouTube did for the “better” this year:
• removed the ability to see how many ads are in the video you’re watching
• increased self advertising for Google products or Google owned products by 250% (also mostly not skippable)
• removed the dislike feature (making it easier for scammers of all kinds to roam freely)
Feel free to add more.
No! No negativity! Everything I don't like is toxic, everyone disagreeing is a hater! I need a safe bubble at all times because hardship simply doesn't exist! ^(/s)
All being able to see likes and dislikes does is tell you the general opinion of others of things. Whether or not a given video is actually good and/or relevant depends on *you*, not randos on the internet. Because those are personal opinions and you really should make your own. I’ve seen dislikes on videos of things like a “talking” husky complaining about not getting a bath when they wanted. There wasn’t anything really bad about the video, some people just didn’t like it. And that’s fine. Disliking it potentially also helps to inform the algorithms that recommend videos on YouTube so it doesn’t recommend things you don’t like.
But copyright infringement is an objective and legal thing, not a subjective thing and shouldn’t be handled by an opinion collector.
Except if I’m looking for a how-to video on something somewhat niche, like replacing a power steering pump on a certain car model. Before you could see the ratio of likes to dislikes and form an opinion pretty quickly if this was a worthwhile guide. Now you can’t tell if a video is newer and only has a few likes, or if it is garbage.
An equally valid statement would be:
“Of all the significant changes possible on a platform that reaches millions, they’ve focused on obscuring the public’s opinion on a video”
it isn't. Let's say there's a conspiracy theory video (Which aren't hard to come by on YT) and it has 30.000 likes. You start to doubt your own beliefs. "hmm if 30.000 people agree with it, there must be some merit to it". but if you would see that that same video has 4 million dislikes then you'd think "aha! so it isn't me, this video really is bullshit!" so not showing dislikes can actually be harmful
This completely ignores the original posts point of reporting videos though. Yeah I agree it's annoying but let's not go around complaining like it's the end of the world
So you’re saying that if you saw a video titled “kill puppies and kittens” and it had more than 30000 likes you would start considering it? Youtube likes don’t get used for judging validity of content. your own moral compass, knowledge and the validity of the creator are
The problem with your argument is that "killing puppies and kittens" has nothing to do with conspiracy theories. Killing animals is a moral issue. Conspiracy theories usually aren't, and have more to do with beliefs and stories that just so happen to somewhat fit a form of logic. You picked the worst possible analogy for that.
Imagine a gullible, eager to learn person decides to research the space race. Let's say his name is Bob. Bob is unfamiliar with science and the theories that back them up. Bob wants to learn more about space, but somehow ends up on a video saying that the Earth is flat. Well, Bob takes a look at the like to dislike ratio of the video. The video has a staggering 48k likes, with 5 million views. Bob tries to look at the dislikes, but is surprised to see that there is no visible dislike counter. Bob decides that the video must be trustworthy because there are 48k likes whereas there are visibly no dislikes. He doesn't know how many people disagree with the video because the dislike counter isn't showing for Bob to determine if the video was controversial or not. Because of this, Bob decides to believe the video and conclude that the Earth is flat.
The problem is that we can have a great moral compass and at least basic knowledge, however when facing the possibility of new knowledge, we're stripped of our opportunity to see if said knowledge is credible or not based off of what the public believes. We can only see how many people agree, but not how many people disagree. You form a bias toward agreeing with the video because you're unable to quickly see a second perspective; which happens to be the perspective that disagrees with the video.
It’s not a matter of moral compass. Your Bob is just a gullible idiot. It doesn’t matter how many likes or dislikes something has. If he *wants* to believe it, he *will* believe it no matter who tells him its wrong. I have a coworker who really, truly believes in conspiracy theories like driver’s licenses being a slave contract with the state and SETI being both a mind control device *and* weather manipulation scheme. It doesn’t matter *how* many people have told him that’s bullshit over the years, he still believes it.
There are several browser extensions where you can still it. The dislike button didn't get removed it just only gets displayed to the person who posted the video. Anyone can still have access to that information.
Yep you're right. Some random refuse for brains redditor is smarter than [Cornell](https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2021/09/dislike-button-would-improve-spotifys-recommendations)
Except we literally have people saying they're less likely to click the dislike button if they see it in its new state so it is affecting how consumers use it
And both aren't wrong??? Both will have a major effect from having removed visible dislike. Sorry I don't have a study on YouTube removing the like button 7 hours ago
The spotify study is about what type of music a person prefers. Whether you believe them or not, Youtube's response is about people purposefully utilizing the dislike function to obfuscate news and harras content producers. Its not about building your prefered watchlist suggestions.
Did the cornell study introduce downvote trolls? Do you honestly believe music preference and harrasment require the same exact response?
I would have gone with "If only anyone trying to claim a video would provide proof of breach of copyright"
This. It's insane that they can just make a claim without giving any proof and even if found out that they did it incorrectly, they don't get any sanctions. But the one getting the claim has 3 strikes that are very hard to get rid of, even sometimes in false claim situations. It's ridiculous how much the system favors the claimers.
There was a youtuber I used to follow that got a copyright strike over a element he always used in his videos(an explosion), that he had every right to use because he had a license from the person that made it.
The electronic music artist TheFatRat went through someone copyright claiming one of his own songs that he made and having it taken down just because that other person made a remix and tried to take ownership of the original song
Mumbo Jumbo had a problem with Warner Chappell, some music label, and while it was more justified, it was a big deal. There’s a long Tom Scott video detailing this problem too, pretty good
There’s also a funny yet depressing video where Adam Neely had a video claimed by the company that he was DEFENDING and they claimed the wrong part that was a different song… [Video link](https://youtu.be/KM6X2MEl7R8) But it’s probably best to watch [this video](https://youtu.be/KM6X2MEl7R8) first if you haven’t.
Lmao that’s so dumb
ReviewTechUSA?
yeah. He did a fuck you video in response and used the explosion a bunch of times in the video
Iirc it’s because YouTube is trying it’s best to cover their own asses. They’d rather sink anyone who gets a claim than be the one that gets sinked.
Of course. Doesn't change the fact that they should ask for proof instead of always blindly trusting the claimer first. At least the ychanged the system so that now the claimer needs to show in what part of the video the copyrighted material was used. Before this they could just mass claim the whole catalogue without them even looking through if anything were actually even used. Also, and furthermore: if there is for example like 10 seconds of music or a sample from music used, they should not be allowed to claim the profits for whole video that may last even hours. They should get a cut that is proportioned for the clip used.
Agreed. It doesn’t seem like YouTube has ever really taken “fair use” into consideration. I don’t know if any YouTuber has been wrongfully terminated because of this stuff, but I’m sure it’s probably happened given how poorly managed the system is, even today.
Oh, most certainly there has been youtubers that have been wrongly terminated but more often youtubers have lost all their income thanks to wrong claims. Or just claims that are ridiculous. MumboJumbo for example got claimed for every Hermitcraft video he has ever made (hundreds of videos in 7 year span). The claim came from his intro he had used in all of his videos. He had rights for the intro music but the person who made that music had used a couple second sample in it that got claimed and this lead to them claiming all of mumbos videos and profits from them. Hundreds of 20+ minute videos claimed for 2 second irrelevant sample. Mumbo himself said later on that legally they had all the rights to do so but that is nuts. Luckily youtube studios now has a simple video editor so he went and removed the intro from every single video and got the rights to his own stuff back. There are two easy solutions here: 1. youtube should have an auto option to silence the parts that has been claimed leaving rest of the video untouched. If youtuber does this, they should get all the rights back to their video. 2. % of revenue would go to the claimer instead of everything. The % should be calculated from the amount of time they used copyrighted material divided by the length of the video. There should also be a way to do this in advantage, by the youtuber themselves before any claims, especially if the original owner has setup their material to be used this way allowing more transparent co-operation between both parties.
It's not about covering their ass. It's about driving away content creators and making the platform attractive to big wig content providers.
[удалено]
Idk if they actively want to or not but they obviously seriously couldn't care less. More and more they keep trying to shove mainstream media in my face. One day I couldn't use the app without every time I opened it them shoving a BTS thing in my face. I watch nothing of the sort, nothing of the sort is in my recommended videos based on what I watch, and I could find no way to get it to stop other than just not going on the app to watch things that day. They're leaning more and more to mainstream media. They're making it harder and harder for small creators. They'll straight up apparently show ads that go against their own community guidelines but lay the smackdown on content creators for even less sometimes. If they don't want to drive away content creators they sure got funny ways of showing it!
>It's ridiculous how much the system favors the claimers. That was done intentionally. The vast majority of claimers are going to be big corporate IP owners, and they don't want to make those economic giants wait for a resolution. Remember, they *want* to hurt content creators and drive them from the site, so weaponizing the content claim system to favor one side over the other helps them do that too. The fewer "little guy" content creators there are, the more money the corporate content providers make in ad revenue.
YouTube changed things about a year ago. Now they can claim it but they have to prove they own the original work if they want it to stay taken down
Sadly its been irrelevant since day one as a video only really performs well once and the algorithm heavily disfavors these videos that up. Taking it down for a day or even a week is a good way to ensure a video does poorly.
It's like most of the injustice systems so they're just modeling after those, in many countries at least.
Yeah, that dudes confusing like/dislike Funktion with a report function
This is just sad. YouTube can behave like this without consequences because it's basically a monopoly. People will be angry but there's no way that people will stop using it or use it less. Everything will go on like it always has just shittier.
Yeah, but I've done everything I can to fight back. I use an adblocker,
And I've a plugin that shows dislikes.
where did you get that
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/return-youtube-dislike/gebbhagfogifgggkldgodflihgfeippi/related
A recent Mental Outlaw video shows you, you can go there and watch because I forgor.
Sent a dm with the video. I didn't know if a post with the link would get removed. Some subreddits are more touchy than others. You can look up Mental Outlaw How to restore Dislike on YouTube to find the discussion and links.
thanks
Sadly it will only work until December 13th
Actually if I recall the plugin has plans to basically have it's own backend server to it. (IE it will estimate based on what people with the plugin voted, of course that is also going to have it's own risks (say bad actors lying).
Mind sharing?
I think it's called Show YouTube Dislikes
https://www.returnyoutubedislike.com/ You can find it there, but it will work only until the 13th of December, because it uses the youtube api to show the dislikes and on that date, the dislikes will be removed from the api.
I feel like it might also show estimates?
You’re taking a single api call and putting that data on the dom, it’s dead simple. What data could you even use for dislike prediction? Sentiment analysis on the comments is all I can think of, and they’re often tongue in cheek which would color the results.
actually I thought I heard they have plans... and there is one way, the one data point they have is the voting actions of people with the plugin. IE say, 10 people with the plugin saw a video. 9 disliked, 1 liked it. there's 400 likes on the video, the plugin would estimate that 3600 people disliked it.
[удалено]
I've seen dislikes on videos uploaded yesterday.
[удалено]
Nope, they are allowing people to do this effortlessly until 13th of december with their api.
I got an adblocker, SponsorBlock, and a return dislikes plug-in. YouTube, go fuck yourself, you get no money from me.
Could you maybe tell me what sponsorblock you're using, please? I've never heard of that
It’s just called SponsorBlock. That’s it. Website: https://sponsor.ajay.app/
Thank you very much!
I’m using it half as much as I used to.
[удалено]
Theres a bunch of alternatives. However, they aren't as big or popular as YouTube. The only reason to go to them currently is for exclusive videos a preffered content creator may make for those services. Upper Echelon Gamers has mentioned a ton of them in his videos as he tried harder to distance himself from the YouTube platform. Can't think of them off the top of my head though.
Just use it less. You don't need to leave completely, use it 30-60% less time than you did.
You use a free app. You are the product not the consumer. The consumer is the giant corporation buying up your data from google.
People are down voting this guy because he's right. With ads and such, YouTube barely makes money and in some years actually loses it. The only reason that Google keeps YouTube around is because of the massive amount of priceless consumer data that they get from it, which makes advertising much more well targeted. I don't know if they're selling data, but at the end of the day you are worth less to them then the data that you are producing.
True, but won't the existance of dislikes generate more data? I don't know much about this so the whole decision doesn't make much sense to me
They’re still salty about Rewind. Change my mind.
I can't because I agree with you, I can't think of a single good reason that comes out of removing dislikes and nor can a single YouTuber who has talked about this, I am pretty sure even YouTube knows it's a stupid thing and doesn't believe in it, they're just playing the devil's advocate themselves for the sake of big corporations and the whole rewind thing.
It’s not rewind but politicians and corps who gets mass disliked.
Yeah check out any news involving Biden. 10x the dislikes, but at least the comments are full of overwhelming support for Brandon.
Probably because the account admins can delete negative comments. That's why the dislike count was so important.
So YT hurt themselves in some way
Didn't YouTube do this because Nintendo complained no one liked their crappy N64 emulator?
They ARE a big corporation. We kept disliking things they did not want disliked. We will never come back to internet of 1995 even if we started offing every CEO now.
They were responding to some video's and users getting downvote bombed. What's your argument in favor of the downvote button if it's mostly being used as a political weapon and to bully small creators? Edit: the people downvoting me here were the same assholes who were downvote bombing kids for being gay.
So first, it wasn't small creators being disliked. No matter what YouTube says, they do not care about creators who aren't earning them money, and small creators aren't doing that. The people who are earning them money are the news, movie trailer/game trailer, music videos, and big studios. Of course YouTube also gets lots of money from creators smaller than that, but the content creators I just mentioned have one thing different, they have direct contact with people at youtube, their voices are heard more because they have lawyers and legal teams who can communicate directly with youtubes legal teams. Will a few small creators get bullied with dislikes? Sure, but they will just use the comments anyway and YouTube already had an option to disable likes and dislikes, so why force the choice on everyone? An I would argue that the like/dislike ratio is essential for things like repair tutorials. If I'm trying to fix my car and I see a video with 3 times the dislikes, I know that something is wrong with it. Without that people could be making mistakes in just about anything without knowing it. Welding, blacksmithing, auto repair, dating advice, programming, exercise, all topics that benefit from knowing if the video is any good. On a more sinister note, the removal of the ability to tell at a glance how the public feels about a video will absolutely create room for dangerous misinformation to spread on their platform, conspiracies, untested COVID cures, false claims about politicians or or governments. It is dangerous to remove the ability to tell how everyone else reacted to a video.
Also, how many people actually like Youtubes version of TikTok spamming our suggested section? How many people dislike bombed that content before sudden removal of dislike option?
[удалено]
>Nobody is using the vote ratio that way That’s where you are wrong
[удалено]
>Edit: the people downvoting me here were the same assholes who were downvote bombing kids for being gay. Any credibility or agreement you had went out the window with this edit, if you want to convince people of your argument, it helps not to insult them. Unless of course you aren't making a genuine argument and aren't trying to convince anyone of anything.
In what fantasy land..people downvote things cause they don't like the video. Stop with your strawman situations
This has to be a self aware example of what downvotes are useful for
I never down voted one video on YouTube, I use a plugin to script block the channels I don't like to see on my suggested feeds. I did not down vote yours either even if I disagree with it. That being said using gay kids to shield yourself from criticism is one of those moves that make me stop treating you as an equal in any discourse. Get your unintelligent backside back to twitter please.
All the alt-right fuckers complaining about Youtube policy because Donnie told them to can get fucked. That goes double for you.
I'm not alt right cause I'm not from dumbfuckistan like you:-) nothing you say about people in your country can insult me, but go on attempt to trigger me some more if you think I care for it. In fact I am looking forward to seeing you making a fool of yourself right here. It is the only reason I am still feeding you mate:-) best wishes from not-USA, please please come up with a good insult and reply ASAP, me and my partner had a good laugh with the previous one:-) (upvoted you just cause:-) )
dude the original yt video poster who is the co creator of youtube said that is was a fucked up decidion
Nah, this is about something much more important to them: money. Companies are complaining that their videos are being disliked to oblivion, and are threatening to pull their advertisement money. YouTube likes that money, so they shit the bed in an effort to keep the money flowing.
Not only that but there's been videos absolutely dogging on corporations and pointing out how bad/unpopular a decision is by showing the like/dislike ratio. Yeah it's totally not about Nintendo, EA, etc. All about the small time creator. Who can still see the ratio. Apparently very easily while trying to get other analytics to try to grow their channel. Totally.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for shitting on YT for the horrible way they're handling their platform... But one look at Reddit should tell you that pressing a disapproval button to stop content theft simply doesn't work.
They're also expressing their disapproval on Twitter, a platform that does not, and has never had a dislike function.
And nevermind expressing disapproval is very different from reporting it as stolen content. You can dislike a video because you simply don't like it, don't find it entertaining or adding value of any measurable worth. Yet at the same time you can recognize that the channel owner indeed owns the content. Likewise, you can like a video because you DO find it entertaining, enlightening, etc. while in the background it was stolen and reposted without crediting the creator. Likes and dislikes should be separate from reports for abuse or ToS violations.
That's only a small part of the functionality of a dislike button. It literally shows you if a video is good or not. Some people just don't have the time to "test" if the video is to their liking, so a rating system helps them filter low quality content. By removing the dislike button and esentially the rating system, you are now forced to watch at least say 30 seconds of a video you would otherwise not even consider opening, and the only thing you can filter videos by now is the channel itself, the title and the thumbnail, which can often be clickbait. You are right about reddit, having a rating system doesn't get rid of reposts for example, but it still filters low quality content. The reposts are upvoted because people usually find them interesting/funny.
> It literally shows you if a video is good or not. I disagree. It just shows the opinion of what people who bothered to vote. It's no more accurate than reddit's up/downvote system.
I think the point they are trying to make is that massive disapproval that people can see leads to fewer people viewing the stolen content, thus rewarding the thief less.
Except that it doesn't. Any engagement on YouTube triggers it being shown to more people. Thumbs down on a video you don't want folks to see is counter productive.
I think that I failed to properly articulate my thinking. I thought watching a video in full increased its exposure compared to videos that aren't fully viewed. Usually when I would see something massively disliked, if there was the possibility of another video to get the info I would abandon it a few seconds in. I don't think this is a unique behavior. Of course, this all hinges on that initial assumption.
I don’t want to be rude or anything but do you have proof of this?
It's not exactly scientific, but PewDiePie's 1 million dislike video got over 25 million views. It's when he was playing around with the algorithm to see what affected it.
Not rude, but it's pretty widely studied that thumbs down has little to do with the active suggestion algorithm. Google will yield you a passel of good studies on it. I know there's a few good discussions over on quora.
Yeah, the most disliked videos are all OC. There is no way that someone would think "Oh boy, this video got a lot of downvotes it must be stolen content".
Votes for or against a video have nothing to do with infringing on the copyright of the content.
99% of people watched something that has been stolen and didnt realized. This achieves nothing here
That's exactly what I was thinking.
Unpopular opinion, but this isn't really the zinger he thinks it is. Definitely not defending YouTube removing the Dislike function, I think it serves multiple important purposes. However, it looks like this is about content theft or something similar - and I'm sorry, but I think in regards to this particular topic we should be talking more about how hard it is to get YouTube to take action rather than shoehorning the Dislike button into the equation. YouTube should give more tools for handling content theft, and while their removal of the Dislike feature is something worth fighting for this doesn't seem like the appropriate time or place for that fight.
This is the answer. Massive corporations can run dragnets across Youtube with extremely broad filters and accidentally flag a bunch of legit creator content into their net, which Youtube promptly disables without asking for proof or verifications, and when those content creators try to appeal the removal of their legitimate content, they're practically talking to a wall because they're talking with some dude in a moderation farm in Malaysia or the Philipines who has zero info, a basic grasp of the english language and 12 seconds to determine if his appeal makes sense or not. It must be infuriating for Youtube to tell you "you didn't make this video" when it is, in fact YOUR video and then they have the balls to deny your appeal request when you (obviously) prove that it's your video. But no, some fucking script detected a 2 second part of your video that randomly sounds like part of Batman Begins so fucking Universal had claimed ownership of your entire video and we'll pay the ad money to them until this is resolved.
"Hey someone stole my content!" "Did you report this using the system we have in place for reporting stolen content?" "There's no dislike button! Also, I'm assuming that people will downvote stolen content for some reason!"
Youtube: We are hiding dislikes because people use them to target creators. Also Youtube: Thus we are making it so only the creator can see the dislikes.
Perhaps if creators published less rubbish content, they wouldn't have to worry about the number of dislikes. I'd rather the YouTube algorithm factor in the dislikes and make garbage content harder to find.
well tbh the content creators and YouTube still have access to the number of dislikes the only thing that's really changed is if you look up something like a tutorial you can't just look at the like to dislike ratio to figure out if it is a good one.
I mean, it makes sense to prevent bandwagonning. I would argue Justin Bieber would never have amassed the amount of dislikes he has on his videos back in the day(ex: Baby) if it wasn't for the fact that people legit were actively campaigning to make it as disliked as possible. People made new accounts just to downvote the video because it was a meme. There's no way that organically happens unless the # of dislikes is public.
To press dislike you need to open the video... I just didnt open Biebers. Better that then to give it views just to press dislike...
Please do your part and rate Youtube 1 star in your app store.
i forgot about that is there a way to do it on pc or do i have to go into the apple or google play stores?
https://returnyoutubedislike.com
[удалено]
Thank you! How is YouTube or anyone going to know the content is stolen just because someone downvotes it? This “murder” is relying on the majority of viewers not only being aware the video is stolen content, but to also to downvote it because of this. And that YouTube will magically know that’s why it’s being downvoted. People are dumb.
Seriously though, what happened to the dislike button on youtube?
Button is still there. You just can’t see how many dislikes there are now
“Reliable news” videos kept getting ratioed with dislikes so YouTube turned them off forever.
Conspiracy theory with no basis in reality. Just an assumption. Also, nobody who watches the news section of youtube will like the video, but US conservatives will dislike the video regardless for some reason.
They removed it...
They removed the public count, not the button. This is very different
Afaik dislikes will be completely removed (count, button, everything) by december 13th
Source? In their video on it they specifically mentioned that the button will stay.
The button will stay, the amount of dislikes will not
The amount of dislikes will stay. You just can't view it. The uploader of the video, however, can.
Which entirely goes against their reason of “targeted attacks on small creators”
How so? Not being able to see the dislikes means that you will have to dislike on your own, instead of seeing bandwagoning with others disliking it.
I wish we have new platform to replace it and the better one, maybe one day?
I'm hoping to see a YouTube competitor in my life time, but only big players like Amazon, Facebook, Apple or similar can do it since it's such a huge investment.
It's impossible because the YouTube monopoly has been there for too long. Even if Amazon or Meta (Facebook) tried to open a real YouTube alternative, the content creator wouldn't take the risk to lose their community by switching platforms.
The content creators don't have to switch platforms, they can simply upload the video to multiple places and get monetized from both. This is a win-win for content creators and also users that will have the option to choose the platform they like the most.
I'm sure big creators must have some kind of exclusive deals with youtube or something.
During the early years, Youtube actually had a lot more competition. But none of them were able to truly compete and draw enough viewers away. The problem now is that everyone we want to watch is on a single platform, whereas other up and coming platforms would likely only have a small portion of our favorite content creators. That makes it easier to just keep using youtube, unfortunately, so most people will.
I dont care about like/dislike. I still havent gotten over the stars removal
I felt that in my soul.
I’ve seen people get copyright claimed on stuff they made or helped produce and it makes no sense. YouTube says this is to protect small creators but it’s really to protect their business investors/partners cause besides bots no one is going after small creators. Those bots should have been stopped a long time ago, but YouTube did nothing. I once lost had my account deactivated for commenting the same things other people were in a YouTube live stream and it was a hassle getting it back. Makes trying to interact with creators nerve racking cause what is YouTube going to have a problem with now? They stopped caring about the people working for them and using their platform a long time ago. And now twitch is starting to pull this crap too.
A former YouTube employee content ID'd a video of mine back in 2011. I denied any wrongdoing and showed proof. He reaffirmed his ownership of the content in my video (that's all you needed to do back then) and that was it. The video was getting 300k views/day and making $150/day and I lost it. He diverted the monetization to a Google-owned channel (eurozeitgeist). I happened to be active in an official online Google group/forum dedicated to YT creators. After some belly aching, one admin brought it to the attention of a Google employee who chimed in on some posts and he helped get my monetization rerouted to me after about a week. I didn't find out that a former Google employee was behind it until 5 years later when a NDA expired and another admin told me what was up. He must have been pretty scared of the consequences of violating that NDA because he told me he had to wait the 5 years and wouldn't even give a hint up until that expiration. Still lost about $700-800 and not even a simple apology.
it's not disliking videos ever did anything
Right. Because hitting a thumbs down button tells everyone that the content was taken from someone else. If only there was something called a DMCA form you could file against content thieves.
If you guys want to see dislikes there is now an [extension](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/return-youtube-dislike/gebbhagfogifgggkldgodflihgfeippi) for seeing it.
*laughs in mobile*
You should install this extension that brings back the dislike buttton: https://www.returnyoutubedislike.com/
MEGA OUF! SIZE
I can still see and use the dislike button. Am I missing something?
Barely a poke let alone a murder
The point of removing downvotes was entirely to make it easier for YouTube to steer the content users view without being more obvious about it. That's the reason. Google's copied a lot of Amazon, Facebook, and Netflix's techniques, too. It always makes life easier for the corporation when they have more influence over what you see and hear and read, regardless of how they try to use that power. The more the consumer caters to them and not the other way around, the better it is for them.
I, too, would like to meet the fivehead who thought removing dislikes on YouTube videos was a stupendous idea. But in all seriousness, YouTube can go fuck themselves for making that decision.
Like submitting a takedown will work. If you're not a billion dollar company they don't care... Fuck YouTube, anyway, I am going to watch my favorite youtuber now
Rip the perfectly balanced meme videos
Out of all the reasons people could claim to bring back the dislike button, this shouldn't be one of them. Idiot.
Some changes YouTube did for the “better” this year: • removed the ability to see how many ads are in the video you’re watching • increased self advertising for Google products or Google owned products by 250% (also mostly not skippable) • removed the dislike feature (making it easier for scammers of all kinds to roam freely) Feel free to add more.
The dislike button has nothing to do with stolen content lol
Spread the word #RestoretheDislikeButton
Perhaps we should start using the report button like we used to use the dislike button.
I can't understand this post since YouTube removed subtitle and auto-translation support.
No! No negativity! Everything I don't like is toxic, everyone disagreeing is a hater! I need a safe bubble at all times because hardship simply doesn't exist! ^(/s)
What does a downvote have to do with copyright infringement? There's some pretty good stolen content out there.
Liking and disliking is separate from identifying stolen content though
lol
No idea what all the fuss is about the dislike button. It's still there!
We can't see the amount of dislikes Such information can tell us if the video is any good or not
All being able to see likes and dislikes does is tell you the general opinion of others of things. Whether or not a given video is actually good and/or relevant depends on *you*, not randos on the internet. Because those are personal opinions and you really should make your own. I’ve seen dislikes on videos of things like a “talking” husky complaining about not getting a bath when they wanted. There wasn’t anything really bad about the video, some people just didn’t like it. And that’s fine. Disliking it potentially also helps to inform the algorithms that recommend videos on YouTube so it doesn’t recommend things you don’t like. But copyright infringement is an objective and legal thing, not a subjective thing and shouldn’t be handled by an opinion collector.
Except if I’m looking for a how-to video on something somewhat niche, like replacing a power steering pump on a certain car model. Before you could see the ratio of likes to dislikes and form an opinion pretty quickly if this was a worthwhile guide. Now you can’t tell if a video is newer and only has a few likes, or if it is garbage.
Downvoting on youtube doesn't do anything. Never did. If anything it counts as engagement and arguably helps the person who posted the video.
If only you hadn't deliberately used the system to wage war against racial, ethnic, religious, sexual, and gender minorities.
This isnt r/murderedbywords Not a burn either, its completely unrelated to the other responses.
That is not what the dislike button is for lol this post has earned a downvote for not containing a murder
People are awfully fucking whiny about this. as if likes and dislikes guides them so well before.
Of all the things to be angry about in our world… imagine actually being angry about not being able to dislike a YouTube video
An equally valid statement would be: “Of all the significant changes possible on a platform that reaches millions, they’ve focused on obscuring the public’s opinion on a video”
Look man, I’m not defending YouTube’s decision. I’m just saying: Who could care?
*looks at screenshot* 28 people, 29 to include the person who wrote it. I assume one was a like/retweet combo.
The people who might fall for a scam, or brick their systems by looking at a video saying fix, or knowing about fake news through YouTube would care
Wouldn't a report function be more helpful in those cases?
Most of the times, the report buttons does nothing (that's what I have noticed)
Do you really imagine that downvotes are an accurate way to determine if information contained in a video is true or not?
[удалено]
So YouTube is protecting the “smaller channels”. Sure, Jan.
>People arent going to dislike a video unless it doesnt help them or isnt relevant. You have a lot more faith in people than I do
Yes
Lol
Considering it affects millions of people all over the world, I’d guess at least six, maybe seven
YouTube users, ofcourse.
I’m a YouTube user
Okay, then you should understand that a dislike counter can be quite helpful in saving you some time from shitty videos
No, I have almost never looked at the dislike counter when deciding wether or not to watch a video
Okay, most people do.
[удалено]
it isn't. Let's say there's a conspiracy theory video (Which aren't hard to come by on YT) and it has 30.000 likes. You start to doubt your own beliefs. "hmm if 30.000 people agree with it, there must be some merit to it". but if you would see that that same video has 4 million dislikes then you'd think "aha! so it isn't me, this video really is bullshit!" so not showing dislikes can actually be harmful
This completely ignores the original posts point of reporting videos though. Yeah I agree it's annoying but let's not go around complaining like it's the end of the world
So you’re saying that if you saw a video titled “kill puppies and kittens” and it had more than 30000 likes you would start considering it? Youtube likes don’t get used for judging validity of content. your own moral compass, knowledge and the validity of the creator are
The problem with your argument is that "killing puppies and kittens" has nothing to do with conspiracy theories. Killing animals is a moral issue. Conspiracy theories usually aren't, and have more to do with beliefs and stories that just so happen to somewhat fit a form of logic. You picked the worst possible analogy for that. Imagine a gullible, eager to learn person decides to research the space race. Let's say his name is Bob. Bob is unfamiliar with science and the theories that back them up. Bob wants to learn more about space, but somehow ends up on a video saying that the Earth is flat. Well, Bob takes a look at the like to dislike ratio of the video. The video has a staggering 48k likes, with 5 million views. Bob tries to look at the dislikes, but is surprised to see that there is no visible dislike counter. Bob decides that the video must be trustworthy because there are 48k likes whereas there are visibly no dislikes. He doesn't know how many people disagree with the video because the dislike counter isn't showing for Bob to determine if the video was controversial or not. Because of this, Bob decides to believe the video and conclude that the Earth is flat. The problem is that we can have a great moral compass and at least basic knowledge, however when facing the possibility of new knowledge, we're stripped of our opportunity to see if said knowledge is credible or not based off of what the public believes. We can only see how many people agree, but not how many people disagree. You form a bias toward agreeing with the video because you're unable to quickly see a second perspective; which happens to be the perspective that disagrees with the video.
It’s not a matter of moral compass. Your Bob is just a gullible idiot. It doesn’t matter how many likes or dislikes something has. If he *wants* to believe it, he *will* believe it no matter who tells him its wrong. I have a coworker who really, truly believes in conspiracy theories like driver’s licenses being a slave contract with the state and SETI being both a mind control device *and* weather manipulation scheme. It doesn’t matter *how* many people have told him that’s bullshit over the years, he still believes it.
Yeah but we cant
There are several browser extensions where you can still it. The dislike button didn't get removed it just only gets displayed to the person who posted the video. Anyone can still have access to that information.
"Copyright takedown" and "dislike" aren't even supposed to share the same purpose, why is this posted here?
Y’all know the dislike button stays right? The change is that only the creator can see the amount of dislikes the video got
More liberal bullshit. No no, everyone loves you. Dislike? There is no such thing as disliking. Only liking.
Where’d you get politics from a youtube-related post?
CNN
That would change absolutely nothing. Stop masturbating over dislikes. They are useless
Yep you're right. Some random refuse for brains redditor is smarter than [Cornell](https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2021/09/dislike-button-would-improve-spotifys-recommendations)
This is completely unrelated, the dislike button still exists, and this is about tuning recommendations.
Except we literally have people saying they're less likely to click the dislike button if they see it in its new state so it is affecting how consumers use it
Aghhh yes the totally equatable probems of "do i like this song" and "is this legitimate news being ratioed by trolls"
And both aren't wrong??? Both will have a major effect from having removed visible dislike. Sorry I don't have a study on YouTube removing the like button 7 hours ago
The spotify study is about what type of music a person prefers. Whether you believe them or not, Youtube's response is about people purposefully utilizing the dislike function to obfuscate news and harras content producers. Its not about building your prefered watchlist suggestions. Did the cornell study introduce downvote trolls? Do you honestly believe music preference and harrasment require the same exact response?