YouTube removing "dislike" count on all videos

[The Buzz]

YouTube announced yesterday that it will make the “dislike” count on videos private across its platform private, but the "dislike" button will remain in place.

In a post on its blog, YouTube admitted that "you might not agree with this decision, but we believe that this is the right thing to do for the platform."

"We want to create an inclusive and respectful environment where creators have the opportunity to succeed and feel safe to express themselves. This is just one of many steps we are taking to continue to protect creators from harassment. Our work is not done, and we’ll continue to invest here."

More from YouTube regarding the decision:

Earlier this year, we experimented with the dislike button to see whether or not changes could help better protect our creators from harassment, and reduce dislike attacks — where people work to drive up the number of dislikes on a creator’s videos.

As part of this experiment, viewers could still see and use the dislike button. But because the count was not visible to them, we found that they were less likely to target a video’s dislike button to drive up the count. In short, our experiment data showed a reduction in dislike attacking behavior1. We also heard directly from smaller creators and those just getting started that they are unfairly targeted by this behavior — and our experiment confirmed that this does occur at a higher proportion on smaller channels.

Based on what we learned, we're making the dislike counts private across YouTube, but the dislike button is not going away. This change will start gradually rolling out today.

Read more here: https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/update-to-youtube/

[Cash Bonus]

No doubt this will be a very ridiculous and controversial move by youtube.

[blackjoker]

It may be good that the count is not displayed.
I think that there are many people who click on harassment when there is a count.

[universal4]

If they remove the dislike count they should also remove the like count.

While I agree that the counts of likes and dislikes can be manipulated to a degree, they want to hide the reality of their manipulation in the background, which is better proven by channel owners showing the counts.

Rick
Universal4

[PROFRBcom]

It may be good that the count is not displayed.
I think that there are many people who click on harassment when there is a count.

This is the most ridiculous argument.

OMG, my video isn't "LIKED" by everyone!?! I must cut myself!!!11!

What kind of pussy world do we live in FFS?

How the **** do you harass someone by clicking a thumbs down button to show that their content sucks?


Weak men make bad times. Bad times make strong men. Strong men make good times. Good times make weak men. Ad infinitum... (A shiny penny if you can guess which phase of this cycle we are currently in!)

[pokeraussie]

They have to please the YouTube channels that are easily offended. What a joke!

[DaftDog]

How the **** do you harass someone by clicking a thumbs down button to show that their content sucks?

If you re-read the OP you'll see that your thumbs down vote will still be visible to the creator. Google's reasoning to make the dislike count invisible is to reduce sheeple from disliking a video just because others have.

[CasinoVIPOffers]

I guess with what is happening with Facebook, a lot of social media needs to be very careful

[chaumi]

"sheeple" magic, a new word for the dictionary

"Google's reasoning to make the dislike count invisible is to reduce sheeple from disliking a video just because others have."


But the same goes the other way. Assuming some 'like' just because others have.


Maybe what they are really trying to tackle here is the negative SEO aspect (Assuming likes/dislikes do actually push a video up or down, I don't know)....and they have evidence that manipulation is more prevalent in negative efforts than positive ( as they implied in the communication, and that would be their argument for not applying the same rule to likes).

[CharlesNoble]

I do not agree with this move.
Why only show the public only positive content/likes. Criticisim is important.

[CatalinAMG]

Maybe what they are really trying to tackle here is the negative SEO aspect (Assuming likes/dislikes do actually push a video up or down, I don't know)....and they have evidence that manipulation is more prevalent in negative efforts than positive ( as they implied in the communication, and that would be their argument for not applying the same rule to likes).

Dislikes still count as engagement so if we're talking monetized video, those that raid certain videos for "dragging them down" are actually doing a favour to the creators.

[chaumi]

Dislikes still count as engagement so if we're talking monetized video, those that raid certain videos for "dragging them down" are actually doing a favour to the creators.

So they move videos up or down on any form of engagement rather than whether positive or negative? Or is this only for paid videos?

[CatalinAMG]

I'm not an expert in this matter, but I do speak from previous brief experiences and personal logic. I don't know about paid videos, but I recall a movie trailer receiving a lot of hate for some reason. It ended up showing on the trending area of YouTube although the likes/dislikes ratio was on the very negative edge. Although this is a bad example, let's look at the Youtube Rewind videos which also receive lots of hate but will still pop up on the homepage, but yet again that is (or at least was since I've heard they will stop making these videos) a different story since it's in Google side of the field and they can play ball as they please when it comes to pushing a video for extra exposure. Nevertheless, YouTube has a bizarre algorithm (as you've probably seen it yourself) ; for example: stumbling upon videos with no relevance whatsoever, yet they started showing in everyone's recommendations).

[universal4]

IMO, they are furthering their attempt to modify people's "perception" which is even further evidence of their manipulation.

Rick
Universal4

[BCGame Affiliates]

If the dislike count is removed then so should the like count. This feels like a manipulative move to me. It is crazy that we moved into a world where people cannot deal with a small amount of public criticism. If you are putting out public content people should be able to publicly dislike it.

[Sherlock]

Disqus made this move years ago.

YT is an entertainment platform of one company. Yes, the platform is monopolistic. And yes, it creates people's opinions. But that is where digital society inevitably is led. Who should tell to YT to show negative button? Or who should tell YT to hide the negative button? Maybe along with the up-thumb? Any regulations of "totalitarian" internet monopolies will just accelerate the spiral of digital totality.

What about to get the life? On individual level? On level of society one has only the option either to die while complaining or to manipulate the likes or do SEO etc., which is the same crap, which is selling some bs to masses. Yes, I am talking about affiliate marketing as well. Complaining about the state of society that inevitably goes towards totality is usually just a visualisation of one's own impotence (just by successful proactive complaining the totality will come faster).

It is fantastic that people whose living is dependent on online manipulation (= all of us... all of us, of course, I am so sorry, all of us except YOU) still are able to complain about online manipulation.

Dogs are barking, but the caravan moves on.

I would like to point out that if you really dislike this post you can not downvote it. As there was never the option on GPWA.

[Spyrith]

The removal of the dislike button is basically just another step for companies like Google and Facebook to remove any control people have over the content they want to follow.

Now that you can't see dislikes, you don't have the information to control / verify if something is worth watching so you have no choice but to believe what YouTube wants to believe, and that a particular video is actually good for you.

I strongly dislike this idea of internet giants removing control from users, but I don't see it changing any time soon.

[CatalinAMG]

Now that you can't see dislikes, you don't have the information to control / verify if something is worth watching so you have no choice but to believe what YouTube wants to believe, and that a particular video is actually good for you.

How does the dislike removal controls your choice of what you are watching? You either like a video or you don't. You press play or you skip it after few seconds if it's something you dislike. The choice is yours if you keep on watching or ignore it in the future. Just because a video has millions of likes, it doesn't mean I should also like it or viceversa. People should worry more about censorship of the free speech and not the amount of hatred a video gets because some snowflakes get offended. Just my two cents, I am taking no sides here.

[Sherlock]

How does the dislike removal controls your choice of what you are watching? You either like a video or you don't. You press play or you skip it after few seconds if it's something you dislike. The choice is yours if you keep on watching or ignore it in the future. Just because a video has millions of likes, it doesn't mean I should also like it or viceversa. People should worry more about censorship of the free speech and not the amount of hatred a video gets because some snowflakes get offended. Just my two cents, I am taking no sides here.

Human brain does not function like you describe it. If it were we would not be here. People do not deliberately become gamblers. It is our work that they became gamblers or...ok the recreational players.

People become gamblers or people buy certain product or people watch / like / dislike certain videos because they are all manipulated. Either by herd or by other people or by marketers (who are just businesses who are disguised as people; e.g. the famous pages with casino ranks make impression that there is really some genuine person who is doing it and not an affiliate whose life depends on it).

So it is indeed a manipulation. Our brains can be easily taught what we have to like and what we do not have to like. It is nothing new, this manipulation always existed. Nations were taught to hate other nations so they had more sources and could survive. Who did the better manipulation won and who did not, lose and ceased to exist. Churches were always manipulating people into what fit to them, but also it helped to maintain a social order. Then marketing came and worked the same way. People are manipulated to buy things they mostly do not need, but it helps to maintain the social order, because person A does not think how can beat or **** person B; but instead thinks that she should by a product C, because was manipulated into the "his/her own decision" that the product C is better than product D owned by person B.

So nothing new. Also nothing that can be described as good or bad. Digital totality is necessary for society to not cease to function. Also will be necessary to uselessly fight against it. So people will have at least an impression that something is being done. In other words they will keep their hope.

Just like by climate change. Some people want to fight against the climate change, just for the sake of fighting. Some people will ignore the climate change. With marketing and manipulation of digital reality people are also divided. Some want to fight against it with a silly hope that something can be done collectively; some decide to ignore what is happening. It is two completely human reactions.

Just gatekeepers are changing. And people who think that they have a free will will be manipulated the most.

[Spyrith]

How does the dislike removal controls your choice of what you are watching? You either like a video or you don't. You press play or you skip it after few seconds if it's something you dislike. The choice is yours if you keep on watching or ignore it in the future. Just because a video has millions of likes, it doesn't mean I should also like it or viceversa. People should worry more about censorship of the free speech and not the amount of hatred a video gets because some snowflakes get offended. Just my two cents, I am taking no sides here.

It does control your opinion by taking away information. A good way to think about this are movie reviews or product reviews. If you're like me, you'll probably dig through tens of reviews to figure out if a 70 episode TV series is worth watching. Nobody wants to commit to something only to figure out halfway that a product is terrible.

Same thing applies to YT vids. You don't have to offer much of an upfront investment - maybe just 10-15 minutes of your time. But if the video has a gigantic number of dislikes you'll know that something is weird about it so you won't take it at face value.

A good example of this are snake oil salesmen who will try to create YT vids of "natural cancer remedies". Normally those would be massively disliked, so you would instantly be able to tell that something was wrong about that vid, and then go check in the comments and see what others have to say.

Without the dislike button, people can be falsely led to believe that a "natural cancer remedy" is actually good, since the video only has likes and no dislikes lol.

Also, I'm all for freedom of speech. In fact, the dislike button is a form of freedom of speech since it's one way to disagree with a stupid opinion.