Odysee, a decentralised YouTube alternative focused on free speech, is officially ending the serving of ads on the platform, starting today. The post:
"Dear friends of Odysee, Starting today, we’re removing all ads. We don’t need ads to make money as a platform and we are confident in the development of our own new monetisation programs that will help creators earn a living and at the same time keep Odysee alive. Ultimately, sacrificing the overall user experience to make a few bucks isn’t worth it to us and nor is it even sustainable for a platform that wishes to make something truly open and creatively free.
As we take this decision, one thing is certain to us, media platforms (even ones that market themselves as ‘free-speech’) typically devolve into advertising companies and end up becoming beholden to their paymasters. It’s been that way for centuries and is never going to change.
As we see YouTube become more aggressive with their ad deployment and ‘Free Speech’ platforms try to build their own ad businesses it’s apparent to us that we’re building a model for Odysee that will keep it sustainable not only financially, but in its ability to provide an incorruptible user experience.
Our approach may be considered niche or unconventional, that’s fine by us. Odysee will be used by the world on terms that are agreeable to its users, and we know our users don’t like ads.
Best, Founder & Creator, Chief Executive Officer. Julian Chandra"
Sorry… I apologise for the misunderstanding and mini-rant.
You appeared to me to be asking a rhetorical question in a sarcastic manner and implying that they aren’t really committed to free speech, and the reason I was frustrated was because I’m quite sick of this platform being labelled as right/far-right when it isn’t. YouTube was just an example one mainstream platform that censors content.
If you’d like to see an example of how committed they are to free speech, I can’t really easily provide a direct source to a question that broad, but I do recommend taking a look at some of LBRY’s earliest posts on Odysee which you’ll find will highlight some of their original goals and vision (LBRY is the protocol Odysee used to use, and Odysee was created by the same team as LBRY). Otherwise, maybe just take a look around the platform, and try to see what kind of opinion or political-related content is on the platform that you don’t tend to see on others which have greater censorship.
Edit: Accidentally commented early, so had to edit it to finish typing. Edit 2: Clarified info about who LBRY is.
deleted by creator
Well I know there’s a lot of right-wing content on there, but I also know there’s a lot of other content there, too. So I don’t think it’s okay when people call it a “right-wing” platform, just because it appears to have more of it on there compared to other platforms.
Why is it not okay to call it what it is? If you openly allow nazis into your site, you have a nazi site. I’m sorry but there’s just no way around it.
Either you nip that garbage in the bud or your site is overrun by far right nut jobs, which is what happened with odysee.
Of course nobody wants to use the site. Why would they?
It’s the nazi bar problem. You allow one nazi to enter your bar, then that nazi brings his nazi friends, and before you notice it you have a nazi bar and no one wants to visit.
Odysee doesn’t “appear” to have more right wing content, it objectively does. The majority of people who migrate to it are wackos who got banned in other places for their extremist views.
The creators of the site allow Nazi content and say that doesn’t break their terms of service. On every other site, Nazism and promoting that ideology is not allowed.
This is what you are arguing for. A site that differentiates itself from other video hosting platforms by giving Nazis a safe space.
While we are at it, lets cancel the postal service since they allow Nazi’s to send newsletters.
Not even a relevant comparison but I wont waste my time arguing with extremists.
deleted by creator
Pretty much. Lets also kick all the Nazi’s outta the planet while we’re at it. Then will people see free speech as a good thing?
Oh wait, no they won’t, because they don’t agree with some rando on the other side of the planet who’s saying that chemicals in the water turn the frogs gay. Let’s not converse with them and determine whether its true or not; lets just exclude them from everything in society for saying something I disagree with and keep listening only to the voices echoing around us.
I hope people truly think about what I’m trying to point out.
I think i see your argument, but your analogies are very polarizing
Something I need to improve in my writing, I guess. Thanks.
