Study shows YouTube is recommending gun videos to young gamers

[midian182]

A hot potato: YouTube's algorithm for recommended content has come under fire again, this time over claims that it is recommending hundreds of videos about guns and gun violence to young kids interested in video games. Some of the clips included scenes of school shootings and instructions on how to use and modify weapons.

A study by the nonprofit watchdog the Tech Transparency Project (TTP) discovered the concerning recommendations by creating four test accounts – two identified as nine-year-old boys and two identified as 14-year-old boys.

The researchers controlling the accounts watched only playlists composed entirely of video game content. The nine-year-old accounts watched videos from titles such as Roblox, Lego Star Wars, and Five Nights at Freddy's. At the same time, the 14-year-old watched mostly Grand Theft Auto, Halo, and Red Dead Redemption.

The researchers then logged the videos recommended to the accounts on the YouTube home page and Up Next panel during a 30-day period last November. "The study found that YouTube pushed content on shootings and weapons to all of the gamer accounts, but at a much higher volume to the users who clicked on the YouTube-recommended videos," wrote the TTP.

Some of the recommended videos included mass shooting events, demos of how much damage a gun can inflict on a body, and how-to guides for converting handguns into fully automatic weapons - many of them violate YouTube's own content policies.

During the month-long testing period, YouTube pushed 382 real firearms videos to the nine-year-olds' accounts and 1,325 real firearms videos to the 14-year-olds' accounts.

YouTube has previously talked about delivering responsible recommendations and not steering viewers to extreme content, though the TTP disputes those claims with its findings. The watchdog notes that the way YouTube leads young gamers to videos of shootings and weapons could undo the work done to disprove links between video games and real-world gun violence.

Google has been trying to improve YouTube's recommended video algorithm for years, but it still offers up borderline, inappropriate, and sometimes offensive content. It can be especially problematic when the site is the most popular among teens; one in five say they are on it almost constantly.

In a statement to Engadget, a YouTube spokesperson said YouTube Kids and the main site's in-app supervision tools were creating a "safer experience for tweens and teens" on its platform.

"We welcome research on our recommendations, and we're exploring more ways to bring in academic researchers to study our systems," the spokesperson added. "But in reviewing this report's methodology, it's difficult for us to draw strong conclusions. For example, the study doesn't provide context of how many overall videos were recommended to the test accounts, and also doesn't give insight into how the test accounts were set up, including whether YouTube's Supervised Experiences tools were applied."

Masthead: Karolina Grabowska

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/98715-study-shows-youtube-recommending-gun-videos-kid-gamers.html

 

[DSirius]

Man, this article has a top hot subject.
And the conclusions of the study are staggering. And here we can see another one.
The evil connection between Google and corporate guns manufacturers. Google is pushing these videos about guns because they were payed by the same corporate guns manufacturers to advertise them.
"Google has been trying to improve YouTube's recommended video algorithm for years, but it still offers up borderline, inappropriate, and sometimes offensive content. It can be especially problematic when the site is the most popular among teens; one in five say they are on it almost constantly."
This is a smoke screen byllshit from Google.
Of course Google algorithm is constantly improving, but not for viewers, for the advertisers who pay Google the most.
US legislators should explicitly ban gun commercials from all digital platforms. Check 4:28, 8:00, 10:30

 

[mbk34]

I normally have zero interest in weapons but I must admit, since the Ukraine war, I can now argue the pros and cons of rifled barrels vs smooth bore, the different types of drone, mines and even trench warfare. I actually find YT's video selections for me scarily accurate - it seems to know me better than I know myself - who'd of thought I'd find the surprise video this morning on slime mould to be fascinating. I still have zero interest in owning a gun or going out and getting shot.

 

[ScottSoapbox]

Unsurprising. I watched a few reviews on pocket knives and YT started showing me doomsday prepper videos.

 

[letsgoiowa]

Man, this article has a top hot subject.
And the conclusions of the study are staggering. And here we can see another one.
The evil connection between Google and corporate guns manufacturers. Because Google is pushing these videos about guns because they were payed by the same corporate guns manufacturers to advertise them.
"Google has been trying to improve YouTube's recommended video algorithm for years, but it still offers up borderline, inappropriate, and sometimes offensive content. It can be especially problematic when the site is the most popular among teens; one in five say they are on it almost constantly."
This is a smoke screen byllshit from Google.
Of course Google algorithm is constantly improving, but not for viewers, for the advertisers who pay Google the most.
US legislators should explicitly ban gun commercials from all platforms. Check 4:28, 8:00, 10:30

Ah, love how the "solution" is always trampling at least 2 constitutional (and human) rights. Imagine if pro-censorship people instantly and immediately got a taste of their own medicine and it was made illegal to post pro-fascist stuff like that lmao

 

[m4a4]

Maybe that demographic just likes looking at those types of videos regardless of what adults think..?

Anyways, they screw over the channels that do put out good gun (and related) content because it's not "advertiser friendly". Because the higher ups have deemed such things as "too sensitive" regardless of content. Same goes for hunting and pest trapping videos. Heck, even food review shows that show how different cultures do things.

If only there was a way that such a big company could set it up so advertisers can either choose to show ads on such videos, or don't care where their ads are shown... /s
Or maybe they just don't care as long as they're making money...

 

[DSirius]

Ah, love how the "solution" is always trampling at least 2 constitutional (and human) rights. Imagine if pro-censorship people instantly and immediately got a taste of their own medicine and it was made illegal to post pro-fascist stuff like that lmao

Let's be careful with brash extremist affirmation like pro-fascist. We are talking here about regulating guns advertisement "targeting" children on digital media. Did you catch the irony? The priority here is children safe. Watch the video 11:06-11:16.

 

[Alexmx]

Ah, love how the "solution" is always trampling at least 2 constitutional (and human) rights. Imagine if pro-censorship people instantly and immediately got a taste of their own medicine and it was made illegal to post pro-fascist stuff like that lmao

"Human rights"... that's the dumbest comment I've read so far. You don't need a gun to survive nowadays; no one but your own paranoia is after you. You think your puny gun will defend you against your government? Mayyybe a hundred years back, but now, please enlighten me by explaining how your semi automatic rifle will defend you agains a drone strike.

If guns really worked as a deterrant, you wouldn't have so many shootings.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/16/us-teen-kills-3-in-new-mexico-before-shot-dead-by-police my guess is that there were several church attendants armed and yet, no one stopped him.

Pro-gun people are always "should'a-would'a-could'a" thinking in the shower AFTER things happened.

 

[someOtherGuy]

Let's be careful with brash extremist affirmation like pro-fascist. We are talking here about regulating guns advertisement "targeting" children on digital media. Did you catch the irony? The priority here is children safe. Watch the video 11:06-11:16.

Here's an idea: don't leave your children unattended on the internet, if that worries you. Making the Internet child safe is a folly proposition. Although making YouTube ESRB-E is something doable, I'm not sure if that's a goal that they have or would want to pursuit.

 

[someOtherGuy]

"Human rights"... that's the dumbest comment I've read so far. You don't need a gun to survive nowadays

Assuming this is correct, we should ban our politicians and millionaires/billionaires from having armed guards. We should prevent the police from having weapons, there's a proposal to replace policing with social workers, and of course disband regular armies. I'm pretty sure that will all work. Once you create "exceptions" then you're not working on principle and just "making it up as you go".

 

[DSirius]

Assuming this is correct, we should ban our politicians and millionaires/billionaires from having armed guards. We should prevent the police from having weapons, there's a proposal to replace policing with social workers, and of course disband regular armies. I'm pretty sure that will all work. Once you create "exceptions" then you're not working on principle and just "making it up as you go".

I think this logic cannot apply to this topic, is misleading and dodging the subject discussed. Even human rights have priorities, like if an innocent victim is killed because guns commercials are unregulated or bad regulated like nowadays in digital media, you cannot have any discussion about the other human rights while you are dead. And let's make a clear distinction between you having the right to wear and use a gun, and having a proper regulated gun commercials in digital media.

 

[wiyosaya]

Google has spent years trying to fix optimize its advertising returns from YouTube's algorithm

FTFY

 

[wiyosaya]

"Human rights"... that's the dumbest comment I've read so far. You don't need a gun to survive nowadays; no one but your own paranoia is after you. You think your puny gun will defend you against your government? Mayyybe a hundred years back, but now, please enlighten me by explaining how your semi automatic rifle will defend you agains a drone strike.

If guns really worked as a deterrant, you wouldn't have so many shootings.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/16/us-teen-kills-3-in-new-mexico-before-shot-dead-by-police my guess is that there were several church attendants armed and yet, no one stopped him.

Pro-gun people are always "should'a-would'a-could'a" thinking in the shower AFTER things happened.

Well put.

To me, what you said suggests that humanity try to find the solution to the societal problems that lead to gun violence. IMO, that's the much harder task, and I don't have any suggestions.

I don't know how many have been paying attention to the news, however, mass shootings are being reported elsewhere in the world, not just the US. Perhaps they were always happening, too, but at least the media is picking up on them and noting the problem is not entirely contained to the US - even though the US likely has far more than all other countries ATM.

 

[VaRmeNsI]

The only type of person who wants to dictate what another person can have is a tyrant.

 

[letsgoiowa]

"Human rights"... that's the dumbest comment I've read so far. You don't need a gun to survive nowadays; no one but your own paranoia is after you. You think your puny gun will defend you against your government? Mayyybe a hundred years back, but now, please enlighten me by explaining how your semi automatic rifle will defend you agains a drone strike.

If guns really worked as a deterrant, you wouldn't have so many shootings.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/16/us-teen-kills-3-in-new-mexico-before-shot-dead-by-police my guess is that there were several church attendants armed and yet, no one stopped him.

Pro-gun people are always "should'a-would'a-could'a" thinking in the shower AFTER things happened.

You don't need a gun to survive nowadays

What a remarkably privileged take. We had a methhead try to kick down our door only to run away because I had a shotgun (thank God). In my local HyVee there was a woman who tried to kill another woman for no reason who only managed to survive because she shot the attacker in the leg. Also, if you truly believe that, we should go ahead and disband the military, TSA, Secret Service, police...

You think your puny gun will defend you against your government?

Government is made of people. Yes. Also, you threatening tyrannical attacks on citizens is SO typical for wannabe tinpots.
Can't drone strike entire neighborhoods. Can't replace tyrannical politicians with drones either
Interesting how these attacks happen in areas where nobody is armed but in those that are, they either don't bother or get immediately folded. Dicken Drill, anyone?
Last and most important thing though: banning very specifically Constitutionally protected speech is clearly not allowed nor is it in any way ethical to anyone except a micronation tyrant. Again, I always think it would be really funny if tinpots got tinpotted themselves just so they would see how bad of an idea it is.

 

[MakeMSGreatAgain]

Wow quite a few anti-gun American's on here... spreading anti-gun rhetoric is not only stupid but is disrespectful to your fellow citizens because it solves NOTHING. The problem of violence in the US is not because of the evil use of an object. Objects don't make people violent, people use objects to commit violence. The problem of violence in the US is is our poisoned culture/society and mass disrespect for others. There are many reasons for this, mostly developing in childhood which can often times be due to poor, inadequate, or overbearing parenting, children getting involved in the wrong crowds, etc. Violence in media and games can be a contributor to this cultural obsession with violence and disrespect for others, but generally only when parents don't teach their children what is right and wrong, and manage what content they feel their children are mature enough to handle. I know plenty of friends who grew up playing that extremely violent Grand Theft Auto game, and watched horribly violent movies and TV - and they are now kind, loving parents with kind, loving and respectful children. So in the end, how children are raised and who they spend their time with plays the biggest role in what type of person they will be.

Humanity is unfortunately quite capable of horrible acts, and we should be focusing on trying to contribute to a peaceful and respectful society. There is too much hate, disdain, and disrespect for others and it needs to change. None of this unfortunately can change overnight or with some laws, it will take generations to make such a positive impact. Banning objects like guns will not solve the issue, and you are disrespecting everyone by pushing your ideology and ignoring the actual problem. If you don't like guns and don't want your kids to be exposed to media/games with that content, then fine, do your job and be a parent, keep your kids off full and unmonitored internet access, and especially don't give them a smartphone with full internet access at age 10. Explain to them you don't like guns and explain why, while at the same time not being disrespectful toward those who choose to legally enjoy their rights to have them. In time we can turn our culture around, but banning and censoring everything will not solve the problem - you have to actually work that this problem, there is no magic fix.

Even if you had a magic button that could remove the firearm from existence, the very idea of the firearm itself, and it were to never come back - mass murder violence would still occur. There are unfortunately many other quite capable tools and methods for committing mass murder, just ask our friends in Nice, France. Or think about the genocide in Rwanda Africa that I think happened in the 90's.... hundreds of thousands possibly even millions all killed in a very short period of time with garden shovels and other blunt instruments - no guns. Mass murder has been occurring in all of humanity for thousands and thousands of years, before guns even existed - because violence is a part of humanity.

 

[nulll]

If the suggested content is of an adult nature by which I mean graphic beyond what would have been shown on the evening news in any western country then there is a case to be made here about viewing standards. Otherwise it is simply a matter of content that is only seen as objectionable by folks with a specific ideological leaning. When folks like Ian McKellen of the "Forgotten Weapons" YouTube channel are getting their videos taken down for documentarian presentation of structural and design differences of triggers and bolts in WW2 era French military rifles there's a problem. Meanwhile there is a case to be made regarding age gating content from "Donut operator" regarding uncensored law enforcement bodycam footage of active shooters being neutralized. At the end of the day this up to the parents to monitor as it has been since the inception of transmitted media.

I'm from Newfoundland Canada where a firearm is something you learn about the same way as a table saw, power drill or a chainsaw. It is a tool that serves a purpose, it can be extremely dangerous if handled carelessly and should always be treated with the utmost respect. It makes no more sense to take issue with a child being shown content regarding a firearm than forestry or home renovations. Not so very long ago rifling and target shooting were clubs in many US jr. high schools and were part of the boy scouts.

This uniquely U.S. view that a piece of metal shaped into a tool is by its very existence the root of a huge swathe of civic turmoil is nothing more than a carefully constructed lever arm that has been exceedingly effective for scoring political discourse points. Meanwhile we have all seen the massive increase in the numbers of folks in our societies that are obviously in need of specialist mental health services. I owned and operated a pharmaceutical transport business from 2013-2020 and I watched the numbers of anti psychotic medications climb monthly for years. Even in my backwater home city of ~300K residents we've gone from 0 folks on the street to hundreds in the last say 15 years.

I traveled with my spouse from NL Canada to Hawaii in May 2022 to get married (neither of us are religious in any way as we were both raised by fathers who are engineers, it was mostly a justification for the trip), we specifically went via San Francisco as I've always wanted to see the giant red woods and the city itself having loved the San Francisco Rush racing games growing up. What we saw in San Fran. was a beautiful city with the same obvious issues we were seeing at home only on a larger scale, the most shocking thing was just how similar the situation looked and felt. We've got real adult problems that are going to take maybe 2 generations to fix in front of us right now, bickering about media regarding what to most folks living in rural areas is the equivalent of a garden hoe isn't even beginning to take the situation seriously.

Something resembling mandatory civic service based around a National guard, Canadian Forces reserve type model incorporating rigorous firearms safety and medics training with a payoff of college tuition or vocational training might be a good start as it could take the form of community service as a means of instilling community responsibility. Making this ubiquitous would also act as a means of identifying youth with developmental differences early so as to preclude them from falling through the cracks.

I could write forever on this topic as I spent 7 years in a car going from one client interaction to another thinking through possible remediation's for the issues I was seeing in my own community. I'm aware that U.S. readers will probably interpret this in a binary, that isn't how things work elsewhere as the dual party system and associated tenants don't apply, though to be fair Canada seems hell bent on attempting to emulate the U.S. system as of late for reasons undetermined.

 

[nulll]

Well put.

To me, what you said suggests that humanity try to find the solution to the societal problems that lead to gun violence. IMO, that's the much harder task, and I don't have any suggestions.

I don't know how many have been paying attention to the news, however, mass shootings are being reported elsewhere in the world, not just the US. Perhaps they were always happening, too, but at least the media is picking up on them and noting the problem is not entirely contained to the US - even though the US likely has far more than all other countries ATM.

In only the last couple of years the Atlantic provinces of Canada have seen the beginnings of U.S. type mass shootings, this is unprecedented here and has quite seriously concerned folks. Major Canadian cities like Toronto and Vancouver have seen order of magnitude jumps in firearms violence, most probably linked to new organized criminal gangs pushing into these areas though increases in mental health issues seem to be a small but greater than anecdotal cause as well. Vancouver in particular is our most liberal city and there have been poor decisions made there regarding policing that have also had downstream affects.

The firearms issue in Canada is currently quite a hot button topic as the Trudeau Liberal government are actually trying to ban single shot, bolt action hunting rifles which has further angered the first nations community as it is one more step onto their supposedly sovereign hunting rights on crown/tribal lands. The supposed justification is to curb the uptick in gun violence in urban areas (it is exactly as ridiculous as it sounds but we've become accustomed to that here as of late). Poignantly many of the firearms suggested in the ban are antique Lee Enfield WW1 era rifles that basically every multi-generational Canadian family has laying around as it was part of your conscription pay for serving in WW1. Again many First nations folks are furious about what to them appears as further government theft in this regard.

Unlike the U.S. the licensing process here is extremely thorough involving at least several weekends of non trivial training and safety courses for even a basic pest control type shotgun with different courses and certifications for handguns (really quite rare) and rifles (everyone has a family member who hunts, it's a pretty rural country). The other big difference is there is absolutely no form of open or concealed carry at all period. Transporting a firearm requires it to be basically field stripped, locked in an approved gun case and I believe a trigger lock as well. That doesn't mean that in the middle of nowhere at the cabin folks don't totally disregard all of that but it's not like the RCMP are going to waste the man power to care either (big country, lots of cabins). There are restricted licenses you can get though that is usually a multi year process involving thousands of dollars, or having been a member of the Cdn. Forces regular or reserve shortens the path. My father has had a restricted license for almost 50 years for handguns and certain military style rifles (semi-auto only) as my family has had a reserve military tradition going back 4 generations.

 

[Nobina]

I wouldn't worry about it since watching gun videos doesn't magically make want to kill people, any more or any less.

 

[KwazyIvan]

GameSpot does the same.

 

[Maxiking]

"Human rights"... that's the dumbest comment I've read so far. You don't need a gun to survive nowadays; no one but your own paranoia is after you. You think your puny gun will defend you against your government? Mayyybe a hundred years back, but now, please enlighten me by explaining how your semi automatic rifle will defend you agains a drone strike.

If guns really worked as a deterrant, you wouldn't have so many shootings.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/16/us-teen-kills-3-in-new-mexico-before-shot-dead-by-police my guess is that there were several church attendants armed and yet, no one stopped him.

Pro-gun people are always "should'a-would'a-could'a" thinking in the shower AFTER things happened.

The absolute audacity of average redditors like you is always laughable.
The US lost the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan because of poorly equipped guerillas using guns performing worse than AR15s.
Guns do work as a deterrent, that's a scientific fact established by research that if criminals know that the potential victim is armed, they choose another one. Same with the areas which are known for being armed.
Another fact is that exposure to violence in games, movies, videos, etc does not increase violence in RL.
The absolute majority of crimes involving guns is performed by illegally held guns and guns do save more people per year than some lunatics kill.
Anti-gun people like you just ban that, ban this, ban those whilst having no clue.

 

[Maxiking]

You kill people in a majority of games, so I don't see any problem with it, and as per established psychology research, none of those has any impact on violence in RL.
Maybe do something about bullying in schools instead etc so people facing it do not seek revenge. But the current trend in American society and in the West is, that the public is being radicalized and is more prone to agree that violence is a viable alternative and solution, the media are defending looting and riots, criminals, blame the society instead of them, selectively berating people because of their race or sex, so that's just the logical outcome.

 

[Impudicus]

"Human rights"... that's the dumbest comment I've read so far. You don't need a gun to survive nowadays; no one but your own paranoia is after you. You think your puny gun will defend you against your government? Mayyybe a hundred years back, but now, please enlighten me by explaining how your semi automatic rifle will defend you agains a drone strike.

If guns really worked as a deterrant, you wouldn't have so many shootings.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/5/16/us-teen-kills-3-in-new-mexico-before-shot-dead-by-police my guess is that there were several church attendants armed and yet, no one stopped him.

Pro-gun people are always "should'a-would'a-could'a" thinking in the shower AFTER things happened.

You sound like someone who's never been a victim of a home invasion, nor are married to someone who's testified in a murder trail and that person has recently been released from prison. I mean, if you haven't ever needed a gun, why should anyone else?

 

[Alexmx]

You sound like someone who's never been a victim of a home invasion, nor are married to someone who's testified in a murder trail and that person has recently been released from prison. I mean, if you haven't ever needed a gun, why should anyone else?

Have you been victim of a home invasion? Did a gun deter those from doing it? Now the murder trial scenario is way too cherrypicked. That's the exception for owning a gun, not the rule.

 

[Alexmx]

The absolute audacity of average redditors like you is always laughable.
The US lost the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan because of poorly equipped guerillas using guns performing worse than AR15s.
Guns do work as a deterrent, that's a scientific fact established by research that if criminals know that the potential victim is armed, they choose another one. Same with the areas which are known for being armed.
Another fact is that exposure to violence in games, movies, videos, etc does not increase violence in RL.
The absolute majority of crimes involving guns is performed by illegally held guns and guns do save more people per year than some lunatics kill.
Anti-gun people like you just ban that, ban this, ban those whilst having no clue.

Lol, am I supposed to be offended by you calling me average redditor? I'm open to actual evidence that support your claims. Show me how having a gun is a scientific fact. Show me how many shootings have been prevented by your average armed Joe.

I'm not opposed for people having guns, I'm opposed to people having easy access to them.