Google muzzles political dissidents with YouTube ID tweaks

 

It's about silo wars not real ones here at Google+

As recently as February this year, Google allowed its users to sign up to its revenue-challenged video sharing website YouTube using a pseudonym.

 

In fact, Mountain View was so proud of that option that its director of privacy, product and engineering, Alma Whitten, penned a blog post in which she pointed out the importance of allowing individuals to provide content anonymously online.

 

"Using a pseudonym has been one of the great benefits of the internet, because it has enabled people to express themselves freely – they may be in physical danger, looking for help, or have a condition they don't want people to know about," she wrote in February on Google's public policy blog.

 

"People in these circumstances may need a consistent identity, but one that is not linked to their offline self. You can use pseudonyms to upload videos in YouTube or post to Blogger."

It's likely that Whitten was seeking to surf the Arab Spring wave. Indeed Google has made a big deal about the use of YouTube by activists across the Middle East as protests erupted across the region.

 

But, even before the arrival of Google+ – which is supposedly storming the interwebs according to, er, buzz from Ancestry.com founder Paul Allen – the company's policy about identity verification has ominously changed.

 

It's no longer possible for individuals to simply log on to YouTube with an anonymous username. The world's largest ad broker has clearly spotted a flaw in the site's business model and is now forcing users to sign in to the video-sharing site using an existing Google account such as that used for, say, Gmail.

 

This, of course, means Google is increasingly herding users of its products into one gated field.

 

However, up until very recently, it was possible for a Gmail account to be created that didn't require a real name to authenticate the individual was who they claimed to be.

 

That's a process that has long been in pace at Facebook. Indeed, Mark Zuckerberg's company even goes so far as to ask its users, whose accounts have been temporarily disabled for violating certain terms, to provide official photo ID to help get their stalking privileges reinstated.

 

And now, Google, with its latest attempt at social networking, is following suit.

 

As we pointed out last week, Google is telling people who have created private profiles in, say, the company's free email service Gmail, that their profile will be deleted after 31 July unless they switch it to public view first.

 

Furthermore, Google has an optional request for individuals to provide photo ID to reactivate disabled accounts. It also demands that real names are created from here on in.

 

What does this mean for the likes of political dissidents wanting to "freely express themselves" without fear of "physical danger" for exposing their real identity?

 

According to a post on the New World Notes blog that details one such case where a Google profile was suspended for using a pseudonym, the company's stance is as follows:

 

"Google Profiles are designed to be public pages on the web, which are used to help connect and find real people in the real world," said Google spokeswoman Katie Watson.

 

"By providing your common name, you will be assisting all people you know – friends, family members, classmates, co-workers, and other acquaintances – in finding and creating a connection with the the right person online."

 

But she declined to comment further on how Google differentiates between "common name" and "real name".

 

The Register put a number of queries to Google about the ID verification shift within its entire online estate now that Google+ has arrived, including requesting a statement about the changes to YouTube.

 

The company pointed us at this link that details its Google Profiles policy. Beyond that we were told: "At this stage, there is no further information to share." ®

 

Views: 38

Replies to This Discussion

It's always a good idea not to call yourself by some oddball sounding name, such as "fLaMeWaRrIor" or "DragonLord," etc. Just use a name that seems real. Foreign names are especially good, because what kind of lousy racist would question whether a foreigner is who he or she says he/she is? Besides, real-sounding names have more credibility with the average joe six-pack or sally soccer mom. As for email, if gmail eventually begins insisting on real ID, many people are sure to quit; and besides, for a few bux per  year you can get a hosted domain with multiple email accounts, etc., so you may call yourself whatever you please, if you really need that. Besides, there will probably always be some individual or group offering free stealth email. Hushmail comes to mind.

RSS

"Destroying the New World Order"

TOP CONTENT THIS WEEK

THANK YOU FOR SUPPORTING THE SITE!

mobile page

12160.info/m

12160 Administrators

 

Latest Activity

tjdavis posted blog posts
4 hours ago
Doc Vega posted photos
12 hours ago
tjdavis posted a blog post
yesterday
Doc Vega commented on Doc Vega's blog post Is this proof that the story about Charlie Kirk's assassination is false?
"Les prone, Thanks Buddy! "
yesterday
Doc Vega posted a blog post
yesterday
tjdavis posted a photo
Tuesday
Doc Vega commented on Doc Vega's blog post Is this proof that the story about Charlie Kirk's assassination is false?
"Less Prone as usual the official version of the truth does not match the evidence and is labeled…"
Saturday
Less Prone commented on Doc Vega's blog post This Memorable Anthem Given by Nick Freitas Hit the Nail on the Head Please Listen!
"Charlie Kirk was getting very critical against Israel and had turned down a lucrative deal from the…"
Saturday
Doc Vega's blog post was featured

The Army of Government Launched Psychopaths

They walk among us in most college towns. They seem relatively reasonable until political…See More
Saturday
Less Prone favorited Doc Vega's blog post Is this proof that the story about Charlie Kirk's assassination is false?
Saturday
Less Prone commented on Doc Vega's blog post Is this proof that the story about Charlie Kirk's assassination is false?
"Have to sign in to YT for this. So. What I do is to go to https://ytdown.io/en/ and download…"
Saturday
Doc Vega commented on Doc Vega's blog post Was a Planned Civil War Averted?
"cheeki kea, you are spot on. The old guard is about to collapse! "
Oct 2
Doc Vega commented on Doc Vega's blog post Alligator Creek and a Japanese Massacre
"cheeki kea, the Japanese thought they could expand their empire and exact enough damage on the US…"
Oct 2
Michelle Reichert favorited Burbia's video
Oct 1
cheeki kea posted a video

NEW DOCUMENTARY - Dissent Into Madness

TRANSCRIPT AND SOURCES: https://www.corbettreport.com/dissent-into-madness/What if the delusions of the dissidents are in fact real? What if their paranoid f...
Oct 1
cheeki kea commented on Doc Vega's blog post Alligator Creek and a Japanese Massacre
"Japan served themselves up no favours by inching out into the South Pacific as they soon found out.…"
Oct 1
cheeki kea commented on Doc Vega's blog post Was a Planned Civil War Averted?
"Their plans did not work out because we are the news now, and the old news is the enemy. "
Oct 1
Doc Vega posted a blog post

Alligator Creek and a Japanese Massacre

The year is 1942 just a few months after the Pearl Harbor disaster. Despite losses suffered by the…See More
Sep 30
Doc Vega commented on Burbia's video
Thumbnail

CHARLIE KIRK WAS CNP! JOSH REEVES 9-11-25

"With all due respect this guy comes off as a drunken asshole and he didn't even  know who…"
Sep 29
Doc Vega posted a blog post

Was a Planned Civil War Averted?

We are living in sadly historic times where good and evil are in battle all the time. Not that this…See More
Sep 28

© 2025   Created by truth.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

content and site copyright 12160.info 2007-2019 - all rights reserved. unless otherwise noted