this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2024
230 points (97.1% liked)

Technology

58092 readers
2855 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Blxter@lemmy.zip 76 points 1 week ago (17 children)

I'm sorry what. What is wrong about weight and fitness videos for youth? Watching those types of videos is what has lead me to lose 100 pounds in real life? Out of everything they have the option to restrict not that I want anything restricted to be honest.

[–] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 83 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

They think being bombarded by them can cause body shame issues, and that teenagers are particularly vulnerable.

They're not removing access, just limiting the volume of recommendations.

[–] random_character_a@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

Yeah, I think we had enough anorexia cases.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] wccrawford@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago (3 children)

FTA: YouTube’s global head of health, Dr Garth Graham, said: “As a teen is developing thoughts about who they are and their own standards for themselves, repeated consumption of content featuring idealised standards that starts to shape an unrealistic internal standard could lead some to form negative beliefs about themselves.”

And while I'm sure this is true, this is a minority of people, and they should seek help for their problem. There are far more who benefit from hearing about the benefits of a healthy lifestyle and how to achieve it.

They should already be hearing that stuff from their parents and teachers, but I have my doubts. And they're much more likely to listen to influencers than authority figures at certain ages.

But the whole thing is even more pointless. They're mostly influenced by seeing these beautiful people constantly on TV, movies, and Youtube, and thinking that they don't measure up to them. Simply stopping some health care videos is going to do nothing for the problem and only prevent videos with the information they need.

[–] Telorand@reddthat.com 38 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm going to push back and say this is actually still a good move. You're assuming the weight and fitness videos are created equal, and I can assure you, they are not.

Most aren't qualified to be sharing exercise or diet information, many are little more than to show off the person's physique or sell a product, and some offer potentially dangerous or pseudoscientific advice that could sabotage a person's progress.

Knowing how to spot those problematic videos comes with experience, and I don't believe teens (in general; there's obviously exceptions) have a well-developed skillset for spotting bullshit.

So while I agree this is probably a PR move, I think it will still be a positive outcome.

[–] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 week ago

We definitely don't need more Andrew Tates in the world.

[–] TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yep.

Something tells me that Google won't be turning down fast food companies that want to advertise with them, or reducing recommendations of channels that show off/review fast food a lot.

Maybe I'm being cynical, but this seems more like a "let's get some good headlines" ploy than something that will seriously help anybody.

I don't know what the best course is, but screwing over channels that promote exercise and healthy living doesn't sound like a good option to me. Even if they can exacerbate some people's perceived body issues.

[–] big_slap@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

hi, what does FTA mean? google shows a lot of different answers, thanks

[–] JWBananas@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] big_slap@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

thank you :)

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Weightlifting at certain young ages can be harmful. I'm not sure if that's part of the motivation as I'm not certain what the ages are, but that's something else to consider.

EDIT: Typo

[–] Blxter@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not more harmful than being obese. Or damage caused by body image issues.

Obesity is one of the leading risk factors for early death Obesity is responsible for millions of premature deaths each year

https://ourworldindata.org/obesity

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

I didn't say that it is.

But to your second point, as others have mentioned, body image issues are likely the biggest reason for the change discussed in the OP.

load more comments (14 replies)
[–] turkalino@lemmy.yachts 45 points 1 week ago (4 children)

So where is the line drawn? What about the teens who want to lookup how to do an exercise correctly without getting injured? The people who make these videos are usually very fit (big surprise!)

I have a feeling this is going to be driven by some AI model that’s gonna do more harm than good

[–] Zron@lemmy.world 27 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It’s YouTube, there is no line, just a vague squiggle that you can cross without any warning.

[–] JigglySackles@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

It's usually that they seem to block the main channels and the small ones that don't know what they are talking about slip through. Going to get some kids hurt doing this.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

From what I understand this is just the recommended feed so it wouldn't affect searching for specific stuff, or binging a channel's backlog.

And frankly speaking this should be a default feature. All too often the algorithm thinks "oh you watched this one video let me drown you in that shit at the expense of everything else".

The whole thing meshes well with what we know from child/youth psychology, btw: Agency makes all the difference, whether they're seeking information, or are (in currentyear), doomscrolling it. One tends to involve critical engagement, the other is an osmosis sponge.

Oh. Speaking of youtube fitness channels, here's a good one. And another one. Like, especially if you haven't done anything in a while, just watch this.

[–] treadful@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So where is the line drawn? What about the teens who want to lookup how to do an exercise correctly without getting injured?

From the article:

The platform will still allow 13- to 17-year-olds to view the videos, but its algorithms will not push young users down related content “rabbit holes” afterwards.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Is there any way they can stop suggesting me right wing channels?

[–] RarePossum@programming.dev 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yes, delete your watch history and use the do not recommend option on video drop downs

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Well, no. It was more a joke, but I have a third party channel blocker installed that I use to block them, but every now and then, I get a new one recommended to me. What I find interesting is is that I never engage with those types of channels, so why would the algorithm ever suggest them in the first place if the algorithm? In fact, the only political content of any type I watch is Behind the Bastards, but it never suggests any left wing content. Kinda odd.

[–] starelfsc2@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I find this happens any time I engage with anything anyone on the right also likes watching, like a gun channel, or a non-political video from a right leaning channel. I think the algorithm is just saying "I saw a republican watch this once so if you watched it there's still some chance you'll engage with this right wing content."

I think it pushes it so heavily because it's a gold mine (to the algorithm) since content by those channels is so heavily consumed.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

One personal benefit of RegularCarReviews coming out as gay has been the purge of right wingers from his channel.

Still, if google can tweak the algo so kids don't get fitness videos, I should be able to have a toogle to keep right wing videos out.

[–] VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

Because it's not God making the choices it's an algo, God would know what you want bur an algo needs data - if there is a popular video that lots of people who watch content you like watch then it makes sense they see if you're interested.

It does the same with everything, your just notice the stuff you hate more, right wingers claim youtube and Facebook push woke stuff for the exact same reason.

[–] MigratingtoLemmy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Don't sign in?

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 week ago

wake me up when they limit teenagers from fascist far right grifters

[–] hightrix@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago

This is fucking ridiculous. I’m actually speechless.

[–] ShinkanTrain@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 week ago

Gotta make space for more nazis.

[–] UncleGrandPa@lemmy.world 12 points 1 week ago

...."Food companies smile in glee"

[–] Freefall@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Honestly, I just want to click on a video and not have my feed instantly become every video on that topic in existence to the exclusion of all else...meanwhile, someone I am subscribed to doesn't show up on my front page when they put something out in a series I have watched 20 videos of.....gj

[–] VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago

The problem is youribe can only have one page of information and that has to be the front page offering old, new, expected and unexpected content in one easy to view list.

You know what would happen if they had a second list that only showed your subscribed content? Literally no one would click on it and everyone would complain it doesn't exist, they proved this in a test where they had that exact feature on every single person's page since they started but here we still are people complaining that their subscriptions don't always show up on the fyp (algo page)

[–] Juice@midwest.social 4 points 1 week ago

YouTube can make sure not to target certain people with certain content but also they have no control over it sending me tons of far right wing stochastic terror influencers like Ben Shapiro and matt walsh

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 2 points 1 week ago
[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

they're not your kids. they belong to instatwitsnaptubetokbook

so fucking glad i don't have kids

[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That is the reason why you're glad you don't have kids? Because if you did you wouldn't be able to control what information they receive?

[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago

one of many reasons. but really, if anyone only needed one reason, then the fact that they're going to inherit a toxic polluted wasteland is reason enough

[–] Eggyhead@fedia.io 5 points 1 week ago

There are so many reasons to be glad not to have kids. Live it up, friend.

[–] VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

It's funny that any time these companies are brought up everyone says they're dangerous yet the second one listens to the sorts of studies about negative affects that get quoted here all the time everyone suddenly decides actually its censorship or brainwashing or corporate greed and that it's evidence they're evil...

Scientific studies said this content can harm developing children so they made efforts to mitigate harm, is it really so hard just to say 'oh thats good, well done' and if so then doesn't that tell you a lot about your own motivations?

load more comments
view more: next ›