YouTube/GunTube Policy change - what do you think?

[treelogger]

I’m sure you can google it if you want. They all have a left wing culture especially not friendly to firearms

That is an over-generalization that becomes a false statement. I've spent the last ~30 years working in Silicon Valley, in just these companies. The political, ethical, and philosophical views of the employees of these companies simply reflect that demographics of the valley: somewhere between 2/3 and 80% are liberal / progressive / libertarian, the others conservative. Several Silicon Valley companies have internal shooting leagues sponsored by the companies, with regular competitions and meetings at Reeds or Metcalf. I've worked with many colleagues who are gun collectors and active competitive shooters. And with many who are also politically or religiously conservative. As just some publicly visible example: Two former CEOs of Hewlett-Packard (the prototypical Silicon Valley tech company) ran for high office as republicans, and the CEO of Tesla ran DOGE at the beginning of the current presidency.

In many cases, the politically relevant actions of these companies match the preferences of their employees, including those in the C-suite. Claiming that this is a "left wing culture" which leads to de-facto censorship is incorrect. On the contrary, I would describe the typical viewpoint as much more libertarian: live and let live.

But that is also tempered by something much more important: A great aversion to risk, and a great love for profit. Is being associated with firearms risky? Yes very, because every time something bad happens involving firearms, the lawsuits go flying. Does being publicly seen as associating with or supporting firearms endanger profits? Yes, because after every mass shooting advertisers don't want to be seen on the videos that the perpetrator watched. Youtube in particular has become very sensitive to creating echo chambers, and its content being used by extremists and crazies, and seen by society as a net negative. While the social media companies are very careful to not do blanket banning of uncommon content and viewpoints, they try to at least confine ad revenue to mainstream forms of expression.

The underlying issue here is that firearms are becoming much more politically polarized, and associated with fringe groups in society. And a lot of that comes from gun people: as long as they embrace not only republicans, but the right edge of republican thought, and as long as they treat democrats (a.k.a. libtards and demonrats) and moderates (who are said to suffer from TDS) as the devil incarnate, this will not improve. If gun culture expects the benefits of being part of the mainstream, it also needs to embrace mainstream mores, such as comity and respect.

 

[Gawernator]

That is an over-generalization that becomes a false statement. I've spent the last ~30 years working in Silicon Valley, in just these companies. The political, ethical, and philosophical views of the employees of these companies simply reflect that demographics of the valley: somewhere between 2/3 and 80% are liberal / progressive / libertarian, the others conservative. Several Silicon Valley companies have internal shooting leagues sponsored by the companies, with regular competitions and meetings at Reeds or Metcalf. I've worked with many colleagues who are gun collectors and active competitive shooters. And with many who are also politically or religiously conservative. As just some publicly visible example: Two former CEOs of Hewlett-Packard (the prototypical Silicon Valley tech company) ran for high office as republicans, and the CEO of Tesla ran DOGE at the beginning of the current presidency.

In many cases, the politically relevant actions of these companies match the preferences of their employees, including those in the C-suite. Claiming that this is a "left wing culture" which leads to de-facto censorship is incorrect. On the contrary, I would describe the typical viewpoint as much more libertarian: live and let live.

But that is also tempered by something much more important: A great aversion to risk, and a great love for profit. Is being associated with firearms risky? Yes very, because every time something bad happens involving firearms, the lawsuits go flying. Does being publicly seen as associating with or supporting firearms endanger profits? Yes, because after every mass shooting advertisers don't want to be seen on the videos that the perpetrator watched. Youtube in particular has become very sensitive to creating echo chambers, and its content being used by extremists and crazies, and seen by society as a net negative. While the social media companies are very careful to not do blanket banning of uncommon content and viewpoints, they try to at least confine ad revenue to mainstream forms of expression.

The underlying issue here is that firearms are becoming much more politically polarized, and associated with fringe groups in society. And a lot of that comes from gun people: as long as they embrace not only republicans, but the right edge of republican thought, and as long as they treat democrats (a.k.a. libtards and democrats) and moderates (who are said to suffer from TDS) as the devil incarnate, this will not improve. If gun culture expects the benefits of being part of the mainstream, it also needs to embrace mainstream mores, such as comity and respect.

Nahhh, it's definitely true in general. Of course there are conservative holdouts that stay under the current but working at Twitter it was blatantly obvious how strong the bias was especially under Jack. There was an entire censorship culture war because of it. That's why Elon fired so much of the dead weight like you mentioned haha. Whelp if Democrats stopped trying to ban guns or pass other anti gun laws they wouldn't be seen that way.

 

[Gawernator]

and yet the facts tell us . . .

That's nothing for them. Post-COVID there was a big shift in culture away from the late 2016's PC culture taking over. Companies will try to appease whoever gets them the most power

 

[ikeo1]

Nahhh, it's definitely true in general. Of course there are conservative holdouts that stay under the current but working at Twitter it was blatantly obvious how strong the bias was especially under Jack. There was an entire censorship culture war because of it. That's why Elon fired so much of the dead weight like you mentioned haha. Whelp if Democrats stopped trying to ban guns or pass other anti gun laws they wouldn't be seen that way.

You're conflating two different things. Tech companies don't request changes to gun laws. Your single experience doesn't reflect the greater valley culture. They aren't inherently anti-gun as much as its not a part of their life nor do they want it to be. Meg whitman from Ebay, Larry Ellison, and others are not democrats and core silicon valley heads.

The blanket statement is just wrong and outdated.

 

[Brandon Breeze]

Any other benefits to being an ambassador ?

I get 10% off on all products in the store, none of which they will send to CA.

Have yet to hear about whatever the discount for the demo pistols is.

Bob just made a video with an update and "the wait will be worth it" is the claim. Who knows. They never respond to emails and the ambassador portal has been down for weeks with zero ETA.

I've been an "Ambassador" since February for reference.