Think you know and carlos i could see your face as you know we were kind of listening to some of that and i dont want to draw too much attention or interpretation from it but you know joking not joking baiting not baiting and the purpose of the motivations obviously hard to really know but im curious for your thoughts carlos from what i understand you tubes response has been chaotic and confounding its confounding to suggest that this is all just jokes as well as we just heard crowder do but i understand that their decision came 6 days after you flagged the harassment to you tube and you know this harassment had been going on for years we have some people on twitter like mark dice and others saying meanwhile carlos mazar encourages people to assault right wingers by throwing milkshakes on them and make them afraid to go out in public f y i and then hes referencing a tweet where you said milkshake them all term that i had to look up and understand but but in all seriousness what do you make of this kind of counterattack this idea that it was a joke and where the line is blurred how do you determine whats a joke and whats not and was the milk shake a joke. Yeah so this is the strategy ive been studying right wing media for. 7 years now for 8 years ever since i left college professionally and this is a strategy that happens anytime anyone brings up a good debate criticism of bigotry or bad behavior on the rate which is the rate just going to argue with a 1000000 distractions meant to put the person who brought the criticism on defense so my life since i brought this up has been people going through old tweets and making fake photos of me sending fake nudes ready to my boss calling in Death Threats over the same purpose which is to get me to overreact about stuff and change my criticism so it was focus but my beef isnt with Steven Crowder maybe because im with mark dice maybe because im with any of these people who are getting about behavior my beef is and has always been with you which is the company that claims that youre about to be people as for the the joking you know i edited and posted a compilation of a crowd or is that about me for 2 years i want anyone to see were not friends ive never spoken to him and never mentioned him in a video or missions or us meant we have no good blood between us he has been unsolicited calling me a list because were in an anchor baby making fun of my voice and my body and the way that i speak for years thats not been the writing and the thing is you tube knows its not friendly ribbing knows no serious person watching this thinks that he was making a friendly joke with one of his gay friends everyone knows his intent was to humiliate me so that too is a distraction and the problem that you tube has is that you have a very clear case right now someone who has repeatedly over the years violated their policy by engaging in the repeated use of racist somehow that somehow im glad you said that because of course that is the point that i think is really at the heart of all of this is whether or not its a violation of policy parallel and civil i want to bring you in here on this because of as carl said several times he doesnt necessarily blame the people that do this he doesnt blame crowder hes blaming you tube for allowing this to happen carolyn whats your thought on that. Well it does say in the policy that if its harmful or if its harassment that that would be grounds for them to remove the only problem there is but the terms and conditions that means that they could not that they will write so that the very you know fine line that we need to understand here and we you know as we talk about these things because at the end of the day you tube is really looking out for you to what is going to garner the most hits whats going to garner the most advertising and so for me when i look at this. Pretty tragic form of bullying thats happening by. Bike rather and im thinking to myself this is a very clear harassment situation and you know you tube should be acting accordingly however because its labeled as satire behind its labeled in a way that he says well im a comedian so therefore this is comedic and this is for effect that somehow gives them this guy that allows them to to say well you know were not going to take everything away will be monetized and i think from both sides left and right they found this to be an inadequate Response Rate me people on the left are saying its not enough people on the right are saying how dare they and i think that the problem is that this is a place where this type of thing can and will happen and caroline as you were speaking or i saw it just i want you to jump out if i can very quickly just you know with regards to the decision to do monetize i know that came hours after you tube published a blog post detailing their own plans to kind of crack down on inappropriate content if you will you know whether it promotes segregation or discrimination based on gender religion or sex and one of our comments thats coming in from our community subaru is saying from a g florus if the platform emphasizes free speech as instrumental to its Business Model it should follow the same speech laws in which it operates u. S. Laws ruled by the Supreme Court protects offensive speech certain speech such as targeted harassment inciting violence is regulated and when it comes to regulation when it comes to legislation we heard you know from from caroline that this is this is tragic and should be somehow controlled what are your thoughts and where do we draw the line where why is this continuing to happen to people like a carlos. So i want to take a small step back and look at the Bigger Picture here because one of the things that happens in an individual episode is we look at dot particular frame and what actually happened but theres a bigger problem you know that you do have an all of the blood from companies which is that Technology Companies and their Technology Companies that are literally mediating the publics fear 25 years ago it wouldnt have been that easy for this to happen what was happening now that weve got carlos maza humor and youre talking about Stephen Carter this would of happened the way it would would have that would that was offensive speech all the time happening in private places in a bar i could go up to a bot and somebody called me wrong guy get away from the country all of those things could have happened but it would have been in a way that wouldnt stand whats happening here on you tube as well as twitter as well as facebook is that that is that is a legit demise ation of what is public what is offensive behavior what does he hate speech and what is borderline like how do you go under the radar for long enough that you want to get called out and theres a lot of. These companies that are actually mediating the public sphere and while the good angels in this odd being actually encouraged because lots of good things have come out of social media it does also atomizing the bad injuries enough and it does lets creative people have those intentions to go and create those kinds of programs that will call out certain types of people and these people know that that Technology Based phones with it ill go to make approach to automation content tell the difference between intent and context and fact it just wont happen. I have seen i have seen crowd as we do i dont think it looks comedic he says its comedic not if you start saying its comedic as a reaction to carlos is accusations that is to me trying to take advantage of the system i dont think carlos show. Well me dick and he is part of. Me. For him its not comedic that has to be taken i do not get it peaking complained all listen to each dave being dehumanised in some way already been attacked. And like i like the point that youre making there because i wanted to bring this up as you were speaking basically you mentioned the borderline content and discovering what that is and how we decipher what that is take a look at my screen here this is you tubes official blog and i did mention that they had put this out as responses when say june 5th and they say that their work has focused on 4 pillars of investing in their policies or resources and products to live up to their responsibility and one of those pillars is reducing the spread a borderline content of course the question assume intent is what does this mean but i want to bring in a comment from someone else that asked what this means for the wider landscape of people because we got a video comment from Conrad Thompson conrad goes by the pronouns they and them and conrad asks a question to you carlos that ill give you and they say that they got their opinion from a bot slime Youtube Video so this is an idea thats out there have a listen to conference issue of whether we should be platform not censor but the platform Steven Crowder has surprising lead to much infighting within the left the crux of the issue is whether by advocating for the platform or anyone the left may be opening itself up to censorship by the monstrous Mega Corporation that is you tube Google Alphabet we can all agree that you tube is too big and too powerful you tube and also to media for that matter throttle to monetize and delete leftist content all the time and have been for a long time carlos what do you think about you tube silencing the far left are some of my comrades justified in fearing corporate. Yeah its a great question and its an exactly that i grapple with all the time my frustration with that is that. You know this is true of any rule of any posi to restrict behavior theres a risk of the policy being misused or used in a way that targets vulnerable groups that is not a defense of having no rules like i dont have a bunch of trust that Police Officers can fairly force the law but im not an anarchist because i think this lucian is to advocate for the air force and all those laws so the alternative to trying to restrict some speech is that you too lets he speech run amok and the net result of that is not people and bullies learn to coexist in peace is that people people of color get tired of suffering that you and i have the platform if you look at 14 and thats what happens you end up having a playground that is run slowly by the bullet so yet theres a risk of of overdoing it or misfiring the solution is to hold you to accountable and especially when there are public facing corporate values claim to care about the people ready there should be some connect between what these states advertisers and how theyve forced their polls and on that point carolyn im curious you know we have a lot of comments that are coming in live on you tube. That are addressing something that we havent explicitly really mentioned which is money. This guy on on our live chat saying you tube is a business it is aiming to get that sweet ad revenue and controversy like this drives people to the site im curious caroline when you you see that comment in kind of a focus on money there and then you see a tweet like this from frankie saying ive been very clear in many threads surrounding this issue between crowder and mazar that i dont think de platforming should be the baseline for addressing these issues i think there needs to be a thoughtful and teared system for dealing with the level of agree just as obviously its all relative you know someone might find one thing more egregious but what is the role of money here and is you tube capitalizing off of controversy i always tell my students follow the money right i mean that. What this is unfortunately all about when we think about you know demonetized saying crowder for his offensive language that actually showed an uptick in sales for some of his hateful paraphernalia that he sells on his site so money is at the heart of all of this for better or for worse for better because that how including sears make money using you tube for words and the fact that he the more people that we have going there the more likely they are to keep some of these more hateful things going on and to carloss point about how about you 2 being an advocate for the l g d l g t l b g t q community as well they really are providing kind of a contrary position to the public and the reason for that again is because of the money if we were to all say hey lets just not news you tube lets just all agree that no one in the world will use you tube then something you know could potentially change however thats not a likely scenario i mean they are one of the Biggest Companies in the world they are the 2nd largest search and we go there to search for recipes so and my point is that in response to that comment thats what im going to follow now go ahead. Well sorry just tell them something for you guys your point there to defend her point. So i didnt know i actually agreed with caroline i dont want to go deep on the point and go full what she thinks about this that is a money thing thats in the picture of full Media Companies a little its not Like Television journalism did not use the legion media approach to do rank beatings up all the time so that is not new whats new at their Technology Companies that have a Global Platform and to trying to build a Global Policy structure even though Different Countries different cultures have different sensibilities on what is hate what does a french what is actually a slow and what is not to slow and whats the context in. Which something actually incited weiland is that this gov inciting violence is a risk of getting docs to these are things that are not similar across the world and yet we we want to run Technology Companies as a business if you have to pick up the moderation policies thing across the world in each particular company so they have if you notice they dont have a hate speech policy for india to do to a wide hindu Muslim Weiland they have a ph beach policy period theyve got it across the world and a continent moderation teams are trying to go off and look at actual context but theyre trying as best as possible to Global Policy structure that can automate as much of the detection and thats where the problem comes and then it gets escalated to a bunch of Human Behavior and people like carlos can complain well its all im going to all the demise of the best they can and that is not looking good one word one in my opinion one thing i think to the problem with that is that its expensive right so the technology cant keep up with the sophistication of how people are posting things the subtleties of sarcasm subtleties you know and the other things weve discussed and in addition if youre talking about those moderators that are they are going through video after video and there was a recent expose about the facebook moderating company that you know people are going through posttraumatic stress syndrome after viewing all rights videos that take their human toll and who are and when youre talking about i mean actual and when we sorry to interrupt you but i just want to get this in here you know weve heard you know different people mention carlos you know situation we focused on that but there are of course many others and i just wanted to share lindsey ahmed whos the host and creator of queer kid stuff on you tube had this experience lets take a listen. Hi my name is lindsay and i run a you tube channel called queer kid stuff where i make plus and social justice videos for kids and families ive been on you tube for about 3 years now and pretty much since day one ive faced daily harassment its actually gotten so bad that about a year or 2 ago i disabled every single Comment Section on every video that i have uploaded to you tube its been a really big problem for a long time and you tube doesnt seem to be doing very much about it at all things that i would love to see from you tube to make this change happen is to hire queer people and people of color in their executive positions to really look at the problem from the inside and get solutions from the community carlos is not a priority for you in terms of trying to solve this kind of thing