#Ethan Zuckerman

[unbfacts]

#Ethan Zuckerman #Pop up ads #Apologized #Advertising

[mostlysignssomeportents]

CDA 230 bans Facebook from blocking interoperable tools

I'm touring my new, nationally bestselling novel The Bezzle! Catch me TONIGHT (May 2) in WINNIPEG, then TOMORROW (May 3) in CALGARY, then SATURDAY (May 4) in VANCOUVER, then onto Tartu, Estonia, and beyond!

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is the most widely misunderstood technology law in the world, which is wild, given that it's only 26 words long!

https://www.techdirt.com/2020/06/23/hello-youve-been-referred-here-because-youre-wrong-about-section-230-communications-decency-act/

CDA 230 isn't a gift to big tech. It's literally the only reason that tech companies don't censor on anything we write that might offend some litigious creep. Without CDA 230, there'd be no #MeToo. Hell, without CDA 230, just hosting a private message board where two friends get into serious beef could expose to you an avalanche of legal liability.

CDA 230 is the only part of a much broader, wildly unconstitutional law that survived a 1996 Supreme Court challenge. We don't spend a lot of time talking about all those other parts of the CDA, but there's actually some really cool stuff left in the bill that no one's really paid attention to:

https://www.aclu.org/legal-document/supreme-court-decision-striking-down-cda

One of those little-regarded sections of CDA 230 is part (c)(2)(b), which broadly immunizes anyone who makes a tool that helps internet users block content they don't want to see.

Enter the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University and their client, Ethan Zuckerman, an internet pioneer turned academic at U Mass Amherst. Knight has filed a lawsuit on Zuckerman's behalf, seeking assurance that Zuckerman (and others) can use browser automation tools to block, unfollow, and otherwise modify the feeds Facebook delivers to its users:

https://knightcolumbia.org/documents/gu63ujqj8o

If Zuckerman is successful, he will set a precedent that allows toolsmiths to provide internet users with a wide variety of automation tools that customize the information they see online. That's something that Facebook bitterly opposes.

Facebook has a long history of attacking startups and individual developers who release tools that let users customize their feed. They shut down Friendly Browser, a third-party Facebook client that blocked trackers and customized your feed:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/11/once-again-facebook-using-privacy-sword-kill-independent-innovation

Then in in 2021, Facebook's lawyers terrorized a software developer named Louis Barclay in retaliation for a tool called "Unfollow Everything," that autopiloted your browser to click through all the laborious steps needed to unfollow all the accounts you were subscribed to, and permanently banned Unfollow Everywhere's developer, Louis Barclay:

https://slate.com/technology/2021/10/facebook-unfollow-everything-cease-desist.html

Now, Zuckerman is developing "Unfollow Everything 2.0," an even richer version of Barclay's tool.

This rich record of legal bullying gives Zuckerman and his lawyers at Knight something important: "standing" – the right to bring a case. They argue that a browser automation tool that helps you control your feeds is covered by CDA(c)(2)(b), and that Facebook can't legally threaten the developer of such a tool with liability for violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, or the other legal weapons it wields against this kind of "adversarial interoperability."

Writing for Wired, Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University speaks to a variety of experts – including my EFF colleague Sophia Cope – who broadly endorse the very clever legal tactic Zuckerman and Knight are bringing to the court.

I'm very excited about this myself. "Adversarial interop" – modding a product or service without permission from its maker – is hugely important to disenshittifying the internet and forestalling future attempts to reenshittify it. From third-party ink cartridges to compatible replacement parts for mobile devices to alternative clients and firmware to ad- and tracker-blockers, adversarial interop is how internet users defend themselves against unilateral changes to services and products they rely on:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/adversarial-interoperability

Now, all that said, a court victory here won't necessarily mean that Facebook can't block interoperability tools. Facebook still has the unilateral right to terminate its users' accounts. They could kick off Zuckerman. They could kick off his lawyers from the Knight Institute. They could permanently ban any user who uses Unfollow Everything 2.0.

Obviously, that kind of nuclear option could prove very unpopular for a company that is the very definition of "too big to care." But Unfollow Everything 2.0 and the lawsuit don't exist in a vacuum. The fight against Big Tech has a lot of tactical diversity: EU regulations, antitrust investigations, state laws, tinkerers and toolsmiths like Zuckerman, and impact litigation lawyers coming up with cool legal theories.

Together, they represent a multi-front war on the very idea that four billion people should have their digital lives controlled by an unaccountable billionaire man-child whose major technological achievement was making a website where he and his creepy friends could nonconsensually rate the fuckability of their fellow Harvard undergrads.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/02/kaiju-v-kaiju/#cda-230-c-2-b

Image: D-Kuru (modified): https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MSI_Bravo_17_(0017FK-007)-USB-C_port_large_PNr%C2%B00761.jpg

Minette Lontsie (modified): https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Facebook_Headquarters.jpg

CC BY-SA 4.0: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en

#pluralistic #ethan zuckerman #cda 230 #interoperability #content moderation #composable moderation #unfollow everything #meta #facebook #knight first amendment initiative #u mass amherst #cfaa

[protoslacker]

Legacy Cities: Ethan Zuckerman

PopTech

Zuckerman wrote a long version of this talk which has links that point to lots of fascinating ideas and research: Legacy Cities: an extended remix of my talk at PopTech 2022.

His blog-post about his vacation is a shorter version with pictures: 14 thoughts on “Legacy cities and the changing nature of the good life”.

I appreciate how he connects the values of cities with online places.

#migration #climate change #history #ethan zuckerman #rust belt #transformative change #Youtube

[mariacallous]

A lawsuit filed Wednesday against Meta argues that US law requires the company to let people use unofficial add-ons to gain more control over their social feeds.

It’s the latest in a series of disputes in which the company has tussled with researchers and developers over tools that give users extra privacy options or that collect research data. It could clear the way for researchers to release add-ons that aid research into how the algorithms on social platforms affect their users, and it could give people more control over the algorithms that shape their lives.

The suit was filed by the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University on behalf of researcher Ethan Zuckerman, an associate professor at the University of Massachusetts—Amherst. It attempts to take a federal law that has generally shielded social networks and use it as a tool forcing transparency.

Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act is best known for allowing social media companies to evade legal liability for content on their platforms. Zuckerman’s suit argues that one of its subsections gives users the right to control how they access the internet, and the tools they use to do so.

“Section 230 (c) (2) (b) is quite explicit about libraries, parents, and others having the ability to control obscene or other unwanted content on the internet,” says Zuckerman. “I actually think that anticipates having control over a social network like Facebook, having this ability to sort of say, ‘We want to be able to opt out of the algorithm.’”

Zuckerman’s suit is aimed at preventing Facebook from blocking a new browser extension for Facebook that he is working on called Unfollow Everything 2.0. It would allow users to easily “unfollow” friends, groups, and pages on the service, meaning that updates from them no longer appear in the user’s newsfeed.

Zuckerman says that this would provide users the power to tune or effectively disable Facebook’s engagement-driven feed. Users can technically do this without the tool, but only by unfollowing each friend, group, and page individually.

There’s good reason to think Meta might make changes to Facebook to block Zuckerman’s tool after it is released. He says he won’t launch it without a ruling on his suit. In 2020, the company argued that the browser Friendly, which had let users search and reorder their Facebook news feeds as well as block ads and trackers, violated its terms of service and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. In 2021, Meta permanently banned Louis Barclay, a British developer who had created a tool called Unfollow Everything, which Zuckerman’s add-on is named after.

“I still remember the feeling of unfollowing everything for the first time. It was near-miraculous. I had lost nothing, since I could still see my favorite friends and groups by going to them directly,” Barclay wrote for Slate at the time. “But I had gained a staggering amount of control. I was no longer tempted to scroll down an infinite feed of content. The time I spent on Facebook decreased dramatically.”

The same year, Meta kicked off from its platform some New York University researchers who had created a tool that monitored the political ads people saw on Facebook. Zuckerman is adding a feature to Unfollow Everything 2.0 that allows people to donate data from their use of the tool to his research project. He hopes to use the data to investigate whether users of his add-on who cleanse their feeds end up, like Barclay, using Facebook less.

Sophia Cope, staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights group, says that the core parts of Section 230 related to platforms’ liability for content posted by users have been clarified through potentially thousands of cases. But few have specifically dealt with the part of the law Zuckerman’s suit seeks to leverage.

“There isn’t that much case law on that section of the law, so it will be interesting to see how a judge breaks it down,” says Cope. Zuckerman is a member of the EFF’s board of advisers.

John Morris, a principal at the Internet Society, a nonprofit that promotes open development of the internet, says that, to his knowledge, Zuckerman’s strategy “hasn’t been used before, in terms of using Section 230 to grant affirmative rights to users,” noting that a judge would likely take that claim seriously.

Meta has previously suggested that allowing add-ons that modify how people use its services raises security and privacy concerns. But Daphne Keller, director of the Program on Platform Regulation at Stanford's Cyber Policy Center, says that Zuckerman’s tool may be able to fairly push back on such an accusation.“The main problem with tools that give users more control over content moderation on existing platforms often has to do with privacy,” she says. “But if all this does is unfollow specified accounts, I would not expect that problem to arise here."

Even if a tool like Unfollow Everything 2.0 didn’t compromise users’ privacy, Meta might still be able to argue that it violates the company’s terms of service, as it did in Barclay’s case.

“Given Meta’s history, I could see why he would want a preemptive judgment,” says Cope. “He’d be immunized against any civil claim brought against him by Meta.”

And though Zuckerman says he would not be surprised if it takes years for his case to wind its way through the courts, he believes it’s important. “This feels like a particularly compelling case to do at a moment where people are really concerned about the power of algorithms,” he says.

[reesestimpson]

The Truth About the Internet as a Business

After reading Ethan Zuckerman's article, "The Internet's Original Sin," I have a better understanding of how the advertising business has evolved on the internet and where it stands today. At its origin, the internet was growing so quickly that it was impossible for it to be centralized in any way. As time has gone on, we have seen companies dominate sectors of the internet. We now have 1 or 2 dominant social media websites, search engines, encyclopedias, etc. This occurred through the monetization of the internet, specifically user clicks. User clicks and time spent on websites is the monetary value that advertising companies are seeking through the internet.

The idea for this form of revenue generation is harmless at first glance, but has evolved into a scary dilemma that we face now and in our futures. The only way for companies to accurately display their users clicks and time spent to advertising companies is through the use of surveillance on our devices. The reason this has became scary is because now advertisers want to target their ads specifically to the audience that is most likely to purchase their products. To deliver these ads, companies track users' activities such as search queries and social media interactions. The common person has no knowledge of how extensive these tracking mechanisms can be, which usually are used without explicit consent from the user.

The early pioneers of the internet had no intention of the business becoming reliant on pervasive surveillance and data collection programs. Once the first few advertising companies succeeded with this type of business model, it took off as the cheapest and most effective form of advertising. Today, most of the services offered on the internet are free because they generate their revenue through this business model. We've reached a point where almost all of the apps we use on our electronic devices are built like this. We've yet to see the repercussions of this information being put into the wrong hands. Most Americans have a false sense of security when it comes to their online privacy, which is why it's important to have these discussions now before we reach a privacy crisis.

#privacy #ads #undefeated

[anitravance]

Week 5: One Blog Post

In his article "Advertising is the Internet's Original Sin," published in The Atlantic, Ethan Zuckerman, one of the creators of the first pop-up ad, offers a profound apology for the creation of this intrusive form of advertising. He acknowledges the negative impact it has had on the internet, leading to a host of problems, including privacy concerns, the spread of misinformation, and the creation of an environment where users are the product. Zuckerman's argument is that the internet's reliance on advertising as a primary source of revenue has been detrimental to its development and user experience.

This perspective is further echoed in Maciej Ceglowski's discusses how internet business models influence surveillance and data coming together on the internet. The current ad-supported model of the internet has led to an unprecedented level of surveillance, as companies gather vast amounts of data on users to target ads more effectively. This model has not only invaded our privacy but also created a fertile ground for the spread of misinformation, as content that generates clicks and views is prioritized, regardless of its veracity.

Zuckerman suggests that the internet needs to move away from an ad-supported model and explore other revenue models, such as subscription services or user data control. This shift could potentially reduce the level of surveillance and data gathering, as companies would no longer need to collect extensive user data to generate revenue. However, this transition would require a significant change in how we perceive and use the internet. Users would need to be willing to pay for services they currently receive for free, and companies would need to find new ways to generate revenue without exploiting user data.

In conclusion, the current business models of the internet have a significant influence on surveillance and data gathering. The ad-supported model has led to an invasion of privacy and the spread of misinformation, as companies prioritize revenue over user experience and ethical considerations. As Zuckerman suggests, a shift towards more ethical business models, such as subscription services or user data control, could help mitigate these issues. However, this transition would require a significant change in user and company behavior.

[sacra1sf]

Advertising: The Foundation of the Internet

Both Ethan Zuckerman in his article "The Internet's Original Sin" and Maciej Ceglowski's talk "The Internet with a Human Face" describe advertising as being the main business model that drives the collection and surveillance of data.

Zuckerman explains his theory that advertising is the original sin of the internet. By this, he means that advertising is what caused surveillance to become so popular. He explains that there are 4 main downsides to having an ad-based business model.

First, the whole appeal of online advertising is that companies can track users' data and interaction with the ad to identify marketing demographics and other information; therefore, it is hard to imagine advertising without surveillance. Second, the advertising model incentivizes businesses to create ads that just rack up engagement, even if it's meaningless, which means the production of content like clickbait. Third, the model leads to the centralization of the web, which shrinks the size and reach of channels. This centralization creates risks to online speech because big companies acquire small ones that may create competition and therefore provides these big companies with extremely powerful reach to audiences. Finally, efforts to mitigate advertising's drawbacks using compensation in the form of personalization can lead users into "echo chambers" of polarized ideas that match the content they have been interacting with.

Ceglowski has similar views. In his talk, he talks about "Investor Storytime," where companies are paid to tell another company how much money they will make if they put an ad on their site. He says that this model encourages surveillance because companies need to show investors why they deserve money and how beneficial it will be to run ads on their site. With all this surveillance, though, not much comes out of it. Sites then encourage personalization of ad content for a better experience, which just means the collection of more data. Ceglowski explains that this is just an opportunity to encourage surveillance because if the model isn't working, then that just means more data needs to be collected for it to function properly, but if it is working well, it would work even better with more data. It is an endless loop that incentivizes the collection of invasive data.

Both Zuckerman and Ceglowski suggest advertising is the main culprit of surveillance. What was intended for good turned sour now that companies have become greedy for more and more data.

#week 5

[headphonebone]

Sea Turtle facts:

Sea turtles are some of the oldest creatures on Earth, with a history dating back more than 100 million years. (Myfwc.com)

Sea turtles are found in warm and temperate oceans worldwide(Seaworld)

Sea turtles' natural lifespan is estimated to be 50-100 years. (Nation Oceanic)

There are only 7 different types of sea turtles (seeturtles.com)

Female sea turtles return to the same beaches where they hatched to lay their eggs, a behavior known as natal homing. (baysoundings.com)

Consumerist and technological facts:

Robitussin: Contains two active ingredients dextrose thorp ham and guaifenesin(Healthline.com)

Pop-up ads: Ethan Zuckerman, the man who invented pop-up ads, has apologized to the world(Forbes)

VR: The first VR headset was patented in the 1960’s and was named the ‘Telesphere Mask’ by inventor Morton Heilig. (Institute of Imagination).

MRI: MRIs are popular because they offer images with more detail than other diagnostic imaging tests. (Kingsbridge private hospital)

AI Robot: by 2045, AI is expected to completely surpass human intelligence. (Valuer.ai)

Attendance Prompt:

"he boiled up a solution of purple-red cochineal and left it under his windowsill to cool. Somehow a phial of acqua regia, a strong acid mixture, broke and spilled across the tin window frame, splashing into the cooling cochineal and instantly turning the liquid bright scarlet."

I thought this was really interesting as someone can accidentally stumble across the color scarlet. It really makes you question if he was able to achieve that specific shade of scarlet again. Could this be achieved without it falling into the cooling cochineal?

[azspot]

Private spaces and businesses are critical for a flourishing digital life, just as cafés, bars, and bookstores are critical for a flourishing urban life. But no communities have ever survived and grown with private entities alone. Just as bookstores will never serve all the same community needs as a public library branch, it’s unreasonable to expect for-profit corporations built with “addressable markets” in mind to accommodate every digital need. Alongside and between the digital corporate empires, we need what scholars like Ethan Zuckerman are calling “digital public infrastructure.” We need parks, libraries, and truly public squares on the internet.

To Mend a Broken Internet, Create Online Parks

#internet

[toothgapart]

The Internet's original Sin

In the article written by Ethan Zuckerman, he explains that in the age of internet, profit is everything. In this sense, the more that a company is able to know their audience and know what they like, the more they are able to cater to them in terms of selling things that they would want. In order to do this, surveillance and date collecting is an easy method of gathering data to better suit a specific customer base. If one is able to suit advertisements to specific groups of people who are more likely to purchase a product, the likely hood of that being a more profitable and better selling item increases immensely. This is seen as an invasion of privacy for many people, but extremely effective in most cases.

[blakegatfield]

The Internet Reflection

The internet is a realm that holds toxic traits that we all wish and act like they never existed. In the article, "The Internet's Original Sin" written by Ethan Zuckerman, he states how we all wish that the good intentions with the technology stayed good after execution. When you really think about it, it all caught up to us out of nowhere. At least as I was growing up, it seemed like I progressed with my knowledge of what the internet was and the cool actions it provided. Now, it is more finding out all of the negatives from the creation of the things within the internet. the article also describes how one of the features that should have never reached the internet is pop-up ads. It takes the user out of personal engagement. A broken business model can lead to a flood of terrible action, and annoyance for internet users. As said in this article, there are always good intentions to be claimed after the negatives had already done damage.

A second perspective is a very insightful, surprisingly accurate depiction of what the internet is as shown in Maciej's talk, "The Internet With a Human Face." Maciej discusses the consequences in which we are approaching with getting as many people a device to join the activities that are on the internet as possible. He mentions how Google has been a frontrunner in recording. There is no such thing as private life online. They are listening, watching, and predicting. The depths to which data collection goes to be able to hack and depict information is beyond me, but I know it is true that "with enough data, anything is possible." Everyone is watching. There are insights to anything, and each search can be a piece to a private life's puzzle.

I hope that sometime soon there will be a common regulation for all companies on data collection, and limit how long someone holds onto information.

[protoslacker]

Core to the Wikipedia project is verifiability, an idea that Heather extends far beyond the idea of authorship and copyright. Across the Wikimedia universe, a “nation of states” that Heather reminds us includes everything from Wikimedia Commons, Wikidata and Wikipedia to Wikifunctions (an open library of computer code), verifiability is a central principle:

“(WP:VER) Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Wikipedia articles is not just made up. This means all material must be attributable to reliable, published sources.”

Verifiability, Heather explains, isn’t just an attribute of the content – it contains the idea of provenance, the notion that an piece of information can be traced back to its source. Heather suggests we think of verifiability as a set of rights and responsibilities – a right for users to have information that is meaningfully sourced and the responsibility for editors to attribute their sources. These rights enable important practices: accountability, accuracy, critical digital literacy and most important, agency. If you don’t know where a piece of information came from, you cannot challenge or change it. Verifiability enables ordinary users to change and correct inaccurate information.

Ethan Zuckerman. Heather Ford: Is the Web Eating Itself? LLMs versus verifiability

#internet #knowledge #verafiabilty #accuracy #accountability #critical digital literacy #heather ford

[alexgricebus315]

The Internet's Original Sin and Maciej Ceglowski Talk

I found a lot of interesting information in the reading The Internet's Original Sin. One of the most interesting points that I read was that Ethan Zuckerman, one of the people that made some of the internet's first ads, had good intentions. These ads did not start out the way that they are today. Ethan wanted to make money on the internet, and most other avenues were not working, so his website went to selling ads. At first, there were very innocent forms of collecting information like just analyzing the person's home page and getting ads that fit their style. However, as the internet and technology advanced the avenues that people were able to get information advanced. They are now able to know almost anything about you. If you doubt this just go to your ad settings on google and there will be a massive amount of information about yourself. After watching Maciej's talk I went and checked out my ad settings as well, and I was very surprised at both the accuracy and inaccuracy of some of the things that I found. I found things like boating, motorcycles, parenting, and potty training. All of these things are inaccurate, but it is also weird how much stuff they got right. They know both my major and minor without me giving them that information willingly, and they know that I had taken a trip to Ohio recently based on my google maps. All of this information true or not was taken without my express knowledge other than accepting the terms of service. If that doesn't seem shady to you I don't know what is.

[lunamatteo98]

Internet Business Models Influence Surveillance and Data Gathering on the Internet

Reading: The Internet's Original Sin, Ethan Zuckerman 

Video: The Internet with a human face, Maciej Ceglowski 

Websites, social media, and Apps on the phone are funded by advertisements and in return, a huge collection of data is pulled from all of it. The original idea was great, let's have advertisements to fund our platform, and the companies get to push their business to the world. Looking at the big picture now, this was a horrible idea, due to invading privacy and sending mass data across the internet. The only benefit of online advertising is the ability to see who’s looking at an ad. This is because of the data being pulled from the engagement. I agree with the quote from Zuckerman, that it’s not too late to ditch the ad-based business model and build a better website.

Building a better web should be the goal, because there are too many unknown data brokers out there pushing data and spreading your information, without your acceptance. This is absolutely horrifying because of the invasion of privacy. There needs to be more awareness of this subject because we need to build a better website. I can say that almost everyone has had an incident where they were talking about something or googling something and then you start to receive ads for it. This is an invasion of privacy! I have started to cut back on my social media and phone usage over the past year due to growing knowledge in data collection. I do not like the fact that a simple conversation can instantly be collected as data and then give you ads about topics of discussion. I even am against smart tools in the house, such as an Alexa or Google Home. Believe it or not, but the devices are listening to your conversations and collecting the data.  

#internet privacy #google #social media #advertising #pop up ads #internet #invading #privacy

[starrwulfe]

[Audio] 🔊 When social media is at its best, we get genuine human…

🔊 When social media is at its best, we get genuine human connection, built-in audiences, and exciting avenues for creativity and exchange. But our current social platforms are built on a surveillance model, where our data is used to predict our behavior, show us ads, and train the algorithms that keep us perpetually on the platform. It’s time to explore a new vision for social media, where we don’t have to give up on privacy in order to connect. 

#nowlistening #podcast .simpleblogcard_img_block922eb00c33eedfb6d272b1b2167dab78 { float: right; padding: 10px; } .simpleblogcard_border922eb00c33eedfb6d272b1b2167dab78 { border-left: solid 5px #4ba303; padding: 0.25em 0.25em; background: transparent; } .simpleblogcard_title922eb00c33eedfb6d272b1b2167dab78 { line-height: 93%; font-weight: bold; display: block; } .simpleblogcard_description922eb00c33eedfb6d272b1b2167dab78 { line-height: 95%; color: #333; }

overcast.fm

How to save social media — Technically Optimistic — Overcast

🎧 In this episode, Raffi talks to prominent critics of existing social media — and the people actively reimagining it, with truly private messaging, hyperlocal communities, and renewed sense of control over our own social data. Guests include Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen, whose 2021 leaks made national news and put the social media giant in the Congressional spotlight; scholar and internet activist Ethan Zuckerman; Meredith Whittaker, the president of the Signal Foundation; Flipboard co-founder Mike McCue; and Harvard Law professor Jonathan Zittrain.

You can follow this podcast on the fediverse here: @6396998

https://overcast.fm/+BBiLy1y-W8🔁 or interact/reply on :

Bluesky

[bilaldemirkr]

Yüzyılın sorusu cevap buldu! YouTube’a bugüne kadar kaç görüntü yüklendi?

New Post has been published on https://bilaldemirkr.com.tr/yuzyilin-sorusu-cevap-buldu-youtubea-bugune-kadar-kac-goruntu-yuklendi/

Yüzyılın sorusu cevap buldu! YouTube’a bugüne kadar kaç görüntü yüklendi?

Dijital dönüşümün lokomotifi internetle birlikte hayatımıza giren mecralardan biri de YouTube. Bünyesinde tonlarca görüntü barındıran ve bilhassa son 10 yılda içerik üreticilerine gelir kapısı olmayı başaran platform her geçen gün büyümeye devam ediyor. Pekala 18 yıldır etkin bir biçimde faaliyet gösteren mecraya bugüne kadar kaç görüntü yüklendi? Bu soru kısa bir mühlet evvel cevap buldu.

YouTube’a bugüne kadar kaç görüntü yüklendi?

Blog müellifi Ethan Zuckerman, web sitesi üzerinden paylaştığı raporla YouTube hakkında bilinmeyenlere ışık tuttu. Buna nazaran platforma 2006-2023 tarihleri arasında tamı tamına 13 milyar 325 video yüklendi. Paylaşılan istatistiğe baktığımızdaysa mecranın 2006′dan başlamak üzere bir büyüme trendine girdiği ve 2023 yılı itibariyle tepe yaptığını söylemek mümkün.

Zuckerman, 2023‘te YouTube‘a 4 milyardan fazla görüntü yüklendiğini ve bunun bir rekor olduğunun altını çiziyor. Bunun dışında platformdaki görüntülerin izlenme sayıları da beklentilerin biraz altında kaldı. Çünkü raporda tüm görüntülerin yalnızca yüzde 4’lük kısmının 10 bin ve üzeri görüntülenme elde ettiği tabir ediliyor.

Platformla ilgili ilgi çeken bir başka ayrıntı ortalama izlenme sayısı. Buna nazaran bir YouTube görüntüsü ortalama 39 defa izleniyor. Bunun dışında YouTube’da geçtiğimiz haftalarda yeni bir rekor kırıldı. Rockstar’ın GTA 6 tanıtım fragmanı yayınlanmasının akabinde birinci 24 saat dolmadan 70 milyondan fazla izlendi ve kırılması sıkıntı bir rekora imza attı. Bu rekoru daha evvel ABD’li ünlü YouTuber MrBeast, 59.4 milyon izlenme elde eden “7 Days Stranded At Sea” (“7 Gün Denizde Mahsur Kaldık”) görüntüsü ile elinde tutuyordu.

Peki siz bu mevzu hakkında ne düşünüyorsunuz? Görüşlerinizi yorumlar kısmından bizlerle paylaşmayı unutmayın!

#Video #Youtube