Web Sites Going Out of Business: Are The Information “Bigs” A Platform or a Publisher? (Edge of Wonder)

(post is archived)

[–] • 0 pt

Note: The topic of this vid deals with Information “Bigs” getting rid of certain small-owner sites for having politically different content from what the DS wants. Is this fair? Is it lawful for the owners and audience to be cheated of their free speech rights?

This is the first full vid that I have seen that discusses this topic in some depth.

Edge of Wonder (EOW) tells us that “Big” company algorithms toss much good and factual content at the back of the pack because this content differs from the political slant of the company that presents it (i.e. the DS).
For any company, “revenue growth” is extremely important, but some “Bigs” sacrifice this, so that anti-DS content is sent to the back of the line. One way that this happens is for the “Bigs” to tamper with the algos that deal with “auto-suggest” search engine topic fill-ins, which used to offer the public a great service in placing the best, most-respected content at or near the search engine top. Not anymore. Politics has now taken the place of making money.
Why could this strange thing be happening or even make any business sense? The “Bigs” say that they would rather have short-term losses from so-called “bad” (back-of-the-pack-listed) sites even though they lose money. This behavior is antithetical for owning and running a business. And it doesn’t make any sense.
Who (i.e. what “Bigs”) benefits from this anti-money-making behavior?
What is happening to the EOW site is happening to other people whose small sites discuss current events and discuss what the DS may term as “conservative” or “controversial”.
What scores and the methods of how they were obtained affect a site’s revenue? Watch the vid and look at their graphics to find out.
Note that this vid deals with the machinations of YouTube, but other “Bigs” like Amazon also tamper with their algos of peoples’ reviews for the same reason. In fact, Jeff Bezos has now been dethroned for doing this, and Bill Gates is now the richest man in the world again. What goes around, comes around. Money is power, and the loss of it means a loss of power. And control. (This year, for example, Bezos: 1. lost being in the running to set up and run a ‘Cloud’ contract with the US Mil, 2. lost creating one of 2 east coast hubs for Amazon – this one was slated to be in NYC, and 3. he had to give ½ of his wealth to his wife, whom he’s divorcing, so that he can be with his girlfriend [who is currently married to one of his friends]. “Oh, what a tangled WEB….”)
What can be done about censorship and demonetization to small site owners, like EOW?
The answer ties in with another question: Is the “Big” Information company either an internet “publisher “or a “platform”? How does each “Big” define itself? Is free speech protected by any of the “Bigs”, or are small site owners beholden to the DS up to the highest levels of power and control?
Many small site owners have been discussing with their subscribers their losses of both revenue and public exposure (because of auto-fill search engine algos that shoot good content [or that which is anti-DS] to the back of the pack), and these owners have been asking their subscribers to donate more money, to help make up for these losses.

Watch this vid for more information about this topic. This vid will open the door for more small-site owners to create their own similar vids on this topic and get them out on the web for more of the public to discuss. This is Red Pill material.

Note: The topic of this vid deals with Information “Bigs” getting rid of certain small-owner sites for having politically different content from what the DS wants. Is this fair? Is it lawful for the owners and audience to be cheated of their free speech rights? This is the first full vid that I have seen that discusses this topic in some depth. 1. Edge of Wonder (EOW) tells us that “Big” company algorithms toss much good and factual content at the back of the pack because this content differs from the political slant of the company that presents it (i.e. the DS). 2. For any company, “revenue growth” is extremely important, but some “Bigs” sacrifice this, so that anti-DS content is sent to the back of the line. One way that this happens is for the “Bigs” to tamper with the algos that deal with “auto-suggest” search engine topic fill-ins, which used to offer the public a great service in placing the best, most-respected content at or near the search engine top. Not anymore. Politics has now taken the place of making money. 3. Why could this strange thing be happening or even make any business sense? The “Bigs” say that they would rather have short-term losses from so-called “bad” (back-of-the-pack-listed) sites even though they lose money. This behavior is antithetical for owning and running a business. And it doesn’t make any sense. 4. Who (i.e. what “Bigs”) benefits from this anti-money-making behavior? 5. What is happening to the EOW site is happening to other people whose small sites discuss current events and discuss what the DS may term as “conservative” or “controversial”. 6. What scores and the methods of how they were obtained affect a site’s revenue? Watch the vid and look at their graphics to find out. 7. Note that this vid deals with the machinations of YouTube, but other “Bigs” like Amazon also tamper with their algos of peoples’ reviews for the same reason. In fact, Jeff Bezos has now been dethroned for doing this, and Bill Gates is now the richest man in the world again. What goes around, comes around. Money is power, and the loss of it means a loss of power. And control. (This year, for example, Bezos: 1. lost being in the running to set up and run a ‘Cloud’ contract with the US Mil, 2. lost creating one of 2 east coast hubs for Amazon – this one was slated to be in NYC, and 3. he had to give ½ of his wealth to his wife, whom he’s divorcing, so that he can be with his girlfriend [who is currently married to one of his friends]. “Oh, what a tangled WEB….”) 8. What can be done about censorship and demonetization to small site owners, like EOW? 9. The answer ties in with another question: Is the “Big” Information company either an internet “publisher “or a “platform”? How does each “Big” define itself? Is free speech protected by any of the “Bigs”, or are small site owners beholden to the DS up to the highest levels of power and control? 10. Many small site owners have been discussing with their subscribers their losses of both revenue and public exposure (because of auto-fill search engine algos that shoot good content [or that which is anti-DS] to the back of the pack), and these owners have been asking their subscribers to donate more money, to help make up for these losses. Watch this vid for more information about this topic. This vid will open the door for more small-site owners to create their own similar vids on this topic and get them out on the web for more of the public to discuss. This is Red Pill material.

link