Read on Twitter
For a @themarkup feature, @leonyin and @asankin compiled a list of "social and racial justice terms" with help from @ColorOfChange, @mediajustice, @conmijente and @muslimadvocates, then checked if @YouTube would let them target those terms for ads.
https://themarkup.org/google-the-giant/2021/04/09/google-blocks-advertisers-from-targeting-black-lives-matter-youtube-videos
1/">https://themarkup.org/google-th...
https://themarkup.org/google-the-giant/2021/04/09/google-blocks-advertisers-from-targeting-black-lives-matter-youtube-videos
1/">https://themarkup.org/google-th...
The results are (initially, at least), quite shocking: Youtube bans advertisers from targeting videos using keywords like #BlackLivesMatter 
https://abs.twimg.com/hashflags... draggable="false" alt="">, Black power, reparations, colonialism, antifascist, American Muslim, and sex work.
2/
2/
Even worse: when the reporters asked Youtube for comment on these blocks, the company stonewalled them, and then added even more terms to the blocklist, including Black excellence, LGBTQ, antiracism, civil rights...
3/
3/
Black is beautiful, abolish ICE, believe Black women, queer, Black trans lives matter, antiracism, Muslimfashion and many, many more. The full data-set is on Github:
https://github.com/the-markup/investigation-youtube-ad-placements
4/">https://github.com/the-marku...
https://github.com/the-markup/investigation-youtube-ad-placements
4/">https://github.com/the-marku...
As if that wasn& #39;t enough, there& #39;s the list of terms that Youtube DOES allow ad-targeting on, including white power, white lives matter, white power, etc.
5/
5/
The contradictions go further: you can advertise to "Christian parenting" and "Jewish parenting" but not "Muslim parenting." Racist terms like "white sharia" and "civilizational jihad" are in, too.
6/
6/
After Youtube was called for comment, they started blocking "Christian" and "Jewish" as prefixes on the same keywords that were blocked when associated with "Muslim."
7/
7/
Youtube& #39;s policies offer two explanations for this, the first ("[ads should] ads to reflect a user’s interests rather than more personal interpretations of their fundamental identity") is thoroughly unconvincing. It& #39;s literally nonsense.
8/
8/
The second, though ("[targeting categories could be] used to stigmatize an individual") is both hugely revealing and hugely incomplete, and therein lies the tale.
#zippy=%2Ctroubleshooter-sexual-orientation-in-personalized-advertising">https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/143465?hl=en #zippy=%2Ctroubleshooter-sexual-orientation-in-personalized-advertising
9/">https://support.google.com/adspolicy...
#zippy=%2Ctroubleshooter-sexual-orientation-in-personalized-advertising">https://support.google.com/adspolicy/answer/143465?hl=en #zippy=%2Ctroubleshooter-sexual-orientation-in-personalized-advertising
9/">https://support.google.com/adspolicy...
Youtube is caught in an unresolvable contradiction. On the one hand, you have the company& #39;s statement that "At YouTube, we believe Black lives matter and we all need to do more to dismantle systemic racism."
https://blog.youtube/inside-youtube/susan-wojcicki-my-mid-year-update-youtube-community
10/">https://blog.youtube/inside-yo...
https://blog.youtube/inside-youtube/susan-wojcicki-my-mid-year-update-youtube-community
10/">https://blog.youtube/inside-yo...
On the other hand, you have the platform& #39;s utility to reactionary, racist, genocidal and eugenic communities who are totally in opposition to Youtube& #39;s claimed support for racial justice.
11/
11/
Some of that is unwitting - the company can& #39;t possibly know what& #39;s in all the videos published on its platform - and some is deliberate: Youtube doesn& #39;t want to face the reputational, political and financial consequences of cutting off superstars like Prageru.
12/
12/
They know if that if they allow advertisers to target "Black Lives Matter," some of those ads will show up alongside of Prageru& #39;s racist video, "& #39;Black Lives Matter& #39; Is Not Helping Blacks."
13/
13/
That& #39;s the heart of the contradiction. Sometimes, Youtube wants us to think of its self-serve, algorithmic ad/publishing system as untouched by human hands, an interplay of pure math, initiated and steered by third parties whose choices are not Youtube& #39;s responsibility.
14/
14/
Other times, Youtube wants us to think of it as a corporate person, with identities and values, priorities and ethics. The selective demand that Youtube be considered a moral actor - but only for the outcomes that reflect well on the company - leads to this contradiction.
15/
15/
To be clear, I don& #39;t think there& #39;s any way Youtube COULD operate a self-serve ad platform or a self-serve video program that could proactively identify racist outcomes.
16/
16/
It& #39;s not enough to vet every ad to make sure it& #39;s not racist - they& #39;d also have to vet every possible ad PLACEMENT and make sure that it doesn& #39;t violate its ethics; that is, they& #39;d have to use reliable human judgment to evaluate every single combination of ads and videos.
17/
17/
There isn& #39;t enough human judgement - let alone sound human judgement - in existence to cover that combinatorial explosion. What& #39;s more, Youtube is so consequential to our discourse that its errors would be - and are - hugely consequential as well.
18/
18/
That& #39;s why all this matters: Youtube& #39;s editorial choice has the foreseeable (and, evidently, acceptable to Youtube) outcome of producing an economic boycott of the creators it says it wants to uplift and support.
19/
19/
Youtube& #39;s monopolistic dominance has the effect of making its contradictions matters of civilizational importance.
It wants to be:
* Imperfect
* Moral
* Neutral
* Dominant
and
* Forgiven
It can& #39;t have all of those. It just can& #39;t.
20/
It wants to be:
* Imperfect
* Moral
* Neutral
* Dominant
and
* Forgiven
It can& #39;t have all of those. It just can& #39;t.
20/
And to be perfectly honest, I don& #39;t know what I want it to do here. I mean, it could stop spinning idiotic tales about "[ads that] reflect a user’s interests rather than more personal interpretations of their fundamental identity," but that wouldn& #39;t fix things.
21/
21/
Likewise, it could ban the words "white" and "Christian" in association with all same the keywords it blocks in connection with "Black" and "Muslim," producing a kind of evenhanded idiocy, which is preferable to a biased idiocy.
22/
22/
And it could be more transparent in its "brand safety" tactics, and have some process for appealing bad choices, as @nandoodles - who cofounded Check My Ads - sensibly calls for. They should do this, but it still would leave the contradiction - and its consequences - intact.
23/
23/
Thinking about this stuff gives me a headache. On the other hand, it reminded me to order a copy of SILICON VALUES, the new book from my @EFF colleague @jilliancyork, who is far and away the content moderation expert I trust most in this world.
http://siliconvaluesbook.com"> http://siliconvaluesbook.com
24/
http://siliconvaluesbook.com"> http://siliconvaluesbook.com
24/
If you& #39;d like an unrolled version of this thread to read or share, here& #39;s a link to it on http://pluralistic.net"> http://pluralistic.net , my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
Image: #brand-safety">https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/10/brand-safety-rupture/ #brand-safety
Cryteria">https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/1... (modified)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg
CC">https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File... BY:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en
eof/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Image: #brand-safety">https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/10/brand-safety-rupture/ #brand-safety
Cryteria">https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/1... (modified)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HAL9000.svg
CC">https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File... BY:
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/deed.en
eof/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/...
