Youtube’s “Super Flagger” Program

With a huge amount of video’s being uploaded to Youtube (100 hours per minute), the video sharing website owned by Google has had a very difficult time making sure that the content adheres to their community guidelines.

In an attempt to to catch violations more quickly, Google has decided to hire 200 “super flaggers”. It is being reported that the system has been set up so that the super flaggers can highlight content “at scale”, meaning that they can flag up to 20 video’s at a time.

Who are the super flaggers?

No official list has been released showing who has been hired for the program. Reports have come out that government agencies and NGO’s (non governmental agencies) are included in in the program, but it is mainly made up of individuals who spent a lot of time flagging video’s.

“The Financial Times last week reported that the U.K. Metropolitan Police’s Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit has been using its “super flagger” authority to seek reviews – and removal – of videos it considers extremist.”
Source

Could this system be used against activists?

With government agencies involved in the program, many have been concerned that it could be used to silence dissent.

American activist Mark Dice has had his channel removed from Youtube, without being given a reason. He believes that the super flagging program could be involved.

A Youtube spokesperson has stated: the site has a “zero–tolerance policy…towards content that incites violence,” adding, “Our community guidelines prohibit such content and our review teams respond to flagged videos around the clock, routinely removing videos that contain hate speech or incitement to commit violent acts.”

Google was keen to point out that the final decision about whether a video is removed is theirs and theirs alone.

“Any suggestion that a government or any other group can use these flagging tools to remove YouTube content themselves is wrong,”
Source

Should people be worried about Youtube using super flaggers?

Anyone who publishes on Youtube on a consistent basis knows that most people who flag video’s are usually “haters” of the content. But with thousands of them online, Youtube narrowed the hiring down to under 200. Hopefully those selected have been more inclined to flag videos that actually deserve it. But as is, we will have to wait and see how they operate.

The government and NGO involvement is quite troubling. The ability for them to abuse the program does seem fairly large.

Youtube does hold the final decision in the removal of videos or channels. But over the last decade we have been witnessing the lines between government, corporations and NGO’s become severely blurred. The idea of just simply trusting any of them is not a reality.

Conclusion

Only time will tell when it comes to any impacts that this move will have. The advantage that people have is that for the being, the internet is still an open and free market. If Youtube becomes more totalitarian, it will only open up new opportunities for entrepreneurs to start new options.