YouTube's Ego Is Too Big to Not Fail

It feels like for as long as there’s been an internet, there’s been a YouTube. The video streaming platform was one of the first and the best, and despite many sites attempting to do the same thing, no one could ever quite match the intuitiveness, ease of use, and hype that is the big red play button.

It became a massive online hub for everyone who wanted to upload videos. Be it entertainment or politics, movie reviews, food commentary, how-to instructions, or horror, YouTube was and is the place to go to find it. More people spend their time on YouTube for video content than their actual television.

But YouTube does have a major weakness, and it’s this Achilles heel that I predict will, in the end, cost YouTube its throne as the number one source of user-generated video content; the ego of its own administrators.

The people who run YouTube believe themselves to be right about any given topic in regards to society, so much so, in fact, that they are willing to censor and silence anyone and everyone from a position of moral authority. They truly believe that by silencing others they are shutting down things that are harmful to everyone else, even in defiance of evidence that they’re wrong.

Case in point, my colleague Mike Miller reported how large their egos have gotten. YouTube’s CEO, Susan Wojcicki, openly advocated that the government outlaw certain forms of speech that the left finds disagreeable so that YouTube can then follow suit and ban that type of speech off of their platform:

An example of that, for example, would be COVID. [Who knew?] I’m not aware of there being laws by governments … around COVID in terms of not being able to debate the efficacy of masks or where the virus came from or the right treatment or proposal. [Wait — should there be?]

[Y]et there was a lot of pressure and concern about us distributing misinformation that went against what was the standard and accepted medical knowledge. And so this category of harmful but… legal has been, I think, where most of the discussion has been.

Our recommendation, if governments want to have more control over online speech [Governments? How about “Democrat Parties” — as in “The”?]  is to pass laws to have that be very cleanly and clearly defined so that we can implement it.

In other words, Wojcicki wants our own federal government to ignore the 1st Amendment and start passing laws that literally make it illegal to disagree with her and her circles. They want to silence people about COVID-19 and all they need to make that justifiable is to literally make it possible to arrest someone for speaking their opinion.

Not that it’s stopped YouTube from censoring people in the past. The platform loves censorship and silencing like it’s a hobby. You can ask conservatives like Steven Crowder about that.

The issue is that it’s not just conservatives that begin to worry about being banned or demonetized. Especially if your entire business model is content creation for platforms like YouTube, you start to wonder if the beast that ate your neighbor for wrong-think will eat you next. The likelihood is high, given the fact that big tech is saturated with woke culture and what they consider to be moral and virtuous changes with the political winds.

You may be safe today, but tomorrow you might be public enemy number one.

Not to mention censorship off of banning opinion makes for a very unsafe platform to be on. You might crack what you think is an innocent joke and then suddenly find yourself on the business end of a YouTube employee’s bad graces. They have the power to demonetize your video or censor it outright, and even if they find your video to not be at any fault, the initial period where monetization is at its highest comes and goes. You effectively make a video for free for YouTube.

Instability is one of the most unattractive things to a person, especially when it comes to monetary matters. The proof that people will change things dramatically in order to stabilize their lives can be seen in the mass exodus currently ongoing from blue states like California and New York. It’s a big decision for these people, but they’re making it because they can’t tolerate not knowing if tomorrow they’re going to wake up with a job or if they’ll be able to feed their family.

Enter Rumble.

At this time, Rumble looks like a conservative hangout. Going to their front page you see right-wing opinion dominating it, but that’s not necessarily because Rumble is putting them first and foremost on purpose. It’s a conservative hang-out because it’s the only place conservatives can go where they aren’t silenced.

But it’s that quality that makes Rumble special. No silencing. No censorship. Debate and ideas are welcome there. The people in charge aren’t looking to make it illegal to say anything.

If YouTube is a blue state, then Rumble is a red state, but here’s the catch. You don’t have to completely move off of YouTube in order to be at Rumble. You can upload videos to both platforms.

Imagine if someone has the capability to keep YouTube as their main video hub, but uploads these same videos to Rumble. They build a following and an audience. They make money there and notice the algorithm isn’t as punishing. As YouTube continues to tighten the screws and throw out new rules every other day, Rumble remains free and stable.

As YouTube continues to wane thanks to its own self-destructive authoritarianism and greed, Rumble only grows. More and more people continue to make their way to the platform, including leftists, entertainers, gamers, chefs, and other content creators. Soon, Rumble becomes a very serious threat to YouTube’s throne, then over time it almost becomes equal to it.

At that point, some decisions have to be made by YouTube, but given its entrenchment in political-ideological hell, it’s unclear if it can reverse course and become a platform free of so many restrictions again.

YouTube may never truly fall completely, and for the foreseeable future it will be the king of the video hill, but that doesn’t mean its time at the top is guaranteed. It could restrict itself into failure after failure after failure, handing off the baton to a much more stable and fair platform.

At this time, Rumble seems like that platform.


Trending on RedState Videos