I agree with you @mahgister but still I feel that the original post that was removed was wrong for being taken down. The OP only stated facts no untruths yes just maybe in a mocking way but it was clever and it did make a point. It was too bad some members can’t see what it was meant to be. Oh well it did put a smile on my face when I initially read it.
Any good video sites out there?
So, my post about the clickbait nature of some youtube video sites was removed.
I was not trolling. I was not baiting.
Let's think about this for a moment. This is a hobby that pays attention to reviews. They drive sales, conversations, and how we perceive audio itself.
Therefore, it's relevant to an audio hobbyist site to discuss the kinds of reviews out there. A good, informative review can guide members toward new ways of evaluating audio and help them make more informed decisions. On the other hand, review sites which are inaccurate or even just hyperbolic in their reviews or in their titles also have an impact on how seriously we can take that site. In the case of YouTube, some members here think that it is YouTube itself that is at fault.
So, this is a valid topic for an audio forum. I went to a site -- which shall remain nameless because critique is not allowed, I guess -- which is consistently saying that the latest review is the "best ever" or "the most ultimate XYZ ever" etc. This is the kind of hyperbole which, I am arguing, has a negative effect on other, less manic sites -- which I will not name, either -- the ones not trying to work the algorithms to garner clicks.
The post I made was a claim with evidence -- evidence supporting the claim that there was a hyperbolic quality to the site. That's all I did.
And then my post was taken down.
Let's analyze what has just happened.
Violating post policies means posting "prohibited content."
The rules are as follows:
You will not submit content that is copyrighted or subject to third party proprietary rights, including privacy, publicity, trade secret, etc., unless you are the owner of such rights or have the appropriate permission from their rightful owner to specifically submit such content.
You will not post information that is malicious, false or inaccurate.
You will not post content that is sexually expicit.
You will not post content that is abusive or defames another member of The Service.
Those of you who read my post will realize that I did none of these things. What I did was call attention to a youtube site that -- I am claiming, with evidence -- tends toward hyperbole in their titles.
If this post gets taken down, then I think only one conclusion can be drawn about what has happened to "moderation" here.
- ...
- 40 posts total
If the original (now deleted) thread was implying that Jay (Jay's Audio Lab) engages in hyperbole and sensationalism, then I have yet to witness it. I will admit two things though: his youtube titles can be described as hyperbolic sometimes but I always find that the content is very well balanced and accurate. Secondly, I have not watched all his videos, so perhaps there are some which probably fit the description. |
I think that Jay is very honest...Like the OP is also and his question legitimate ... It is not the question... I am honest also and i may use metaphor and hyperbole to communicate HONESTLY my emotion... All reviewer are not tailored on the same mold either ... All reviewers may be informative and entertaining at some ratio...The best one will be informative and also entertaining... The success of Jay thread come from the balance between the two and the two tools, the objective one and the subjective one used equally... It is why this is a "touchy" matter... And being honest and he is , still he must "sell" his expertise and communicate his feelings... And we as customer must take it with a grain of salt... Nothing is white or black here... But this was not a matter for censorship, even if i understand why for sure...
|
This is pretty much the last thing I’ll say on this issue. Artemus -- Agreed. I’ve done many posts and have been misunderstood at times. When I’m misunderstood, I first look to see if it was how I initially put things. In some cases, I have clarified, in some cases I have retracted, and in other cases I have stood by what I said. In this case, I stand by what I said before, and now. In my initial post, I did not us the Agon user name or his channel. I did list some of the hyperbolic titles, some of what had the name "Jay" in them. I kept the title verbatim because I was quoting. Sleuths here figured it out. Some here rushed in to "save" Jay from my "bashing." But Jay wrote those titles, not me. He has 10k subscribers. He is engaging in public discourse, open to all. My calling attention to title that *he* wrote on a *public* channel is not bashing. Do his friends and followers believe he is so vulnerable as to need their rescue? In my little opinion, the strategy of clickbait titling, on a pubic-facing audiophile channel, contributes to an issue discussed very often on this forum -- the tendency for industry participants, including reviewers, to promote gear with hyperbole ("the best ever" "the greatest" etc.). It is a way of doing things that I think dilutes and cheapens conversation about the hobby. Disagree? That’s fine. What are your reasons? But clutching your pearls and calling me a "basher"? Grow a pair. I’ve explained this position to the moderator who understood what I was up to and promised to pause a bit longer before deleting another post of mine. Again -- I know this site is a "business." But I’m not a business. I’m a person, engaging in conversation with others about an art form -- living in a culture. Culture trumps business in my book, and I don’t ask permission from "business" for what I say. I say it and see what happens. There was blowback. Fine. But some understood what I said, why, and they took away something to think about. I don’t care about convincing the close-minded or other angry keyboard warriors looking to fight a battle. No need to waste time. |
- 40 posts total