This seems deceptive more than anything else. If a content creator doesn't want their videos to be rated they can disable like/dislike ratings entirely. But to remove public dislikes across the entire site takes away a valuable indicator of video quality. Like/Dislike ratio can also express approval and disapproval for the subject itself, which is also valuable.
> But to remove public dislikes across the entire site takes away a valuable indicator of video quality.
Indeed. Which means you'd have to watch the ads (oh, right, there's also a video involved) to determine that the content was garbage.
If you can tell without watching a video that it's trash, you might not watch it - which is opposed to YouTube's goal of increasing total video hours watched. Or, at least, their short term goal of making sure people watch stuff (I suspect the long term effects of making people watch more low grade nonsense won't show up in this quarter's growth numbers, which means it's Someone Else's Problem - get promoted and go do something else, it's the Google Way).
Despite all the claims from Google and YouTube about how they're trying to promote certain content and reduce exposure to others, it's a reasonable bet that their algorithms still don't understand much of anything about a video beyond "Oh, hey, people who watch this video watch more related videos later, so the more people I show it to, the more those people will watch, which increases hours watched!"
So, presumably, "dislikes" interfered with people watching more video. Remove the dislikes, problem solved. At least for their definition of "problem" and "solved."
lol - YouTube and most social media is no longer for us plebs. It's all about pushing propaganda, and unfortunately plebs mass rejecting politically motivated BS is too problematic.
Instead of trying to engage/change minds it's just easier to pretend "problems" like people having the temerity to call BS don't exist. Double plus good.
Even "pushing propaganda" is a bit higher minded than social media seems to be.
It's all about the money. ALL about the money. How do social companies make money? They sell ads.
How do you make more money selling ads? Either you show more ads (increase ad density, or increase eyeball-time-on-platform), or you make more money per ad (I used to see plenty of scam sites - new Kobota tractor for $1500, free shipping, domain registered last week - and far as I can tell, Facebook only cared that their credit card number was good).
More eyeball-time-on-platform requires "engaging" users more - weaponizing psychology, notifications, and A/B testing against them.
Facebook's guiding principles are simple: "What's Good For Zuck is Good For Zuck." The rest are no different.
Don't believe message is more important than ads? Even though everyone is locked down sheltering in place due to COVID pro sports and Hollywood award show ratings are abysmal. If they were all about chasing the almighty dollar there would have been messaging changes well before now.
BTW - there is no better driver of traffic (engagement) to something than a good like/dislike war. This has zero to do with money or they wouldn't be touching it.
