Live Streaming Pros’ Negative Advice/Pro Big Social

Today before my Zoom meeting, I had tuned to Luria Pertrucci’s Live Streaming Pros’ feed. In case you don’t remember her…

On her stream today, out of the bat, it was on the subject what not to do (wait I stand corrected, “DO NOT” was in the title.) Because gawd-forbid you break a social platforms rules, then you’ll be kicked out. Wait isn’t all caps a violation to Facebook’s posting policies for Facebook Pages?

Just sayin’

a screengrab of Live Streaming Pros' Luria Petrucci strongly suggesting "DO NOT schedule Recorded video" of your's truly sarcastically saying "good luck trying to change my mind" with a smiley emoji
“good luck trying to change my mind”

CONTEXT:

Here is the original stream from earlier today

The topics featured by Luria Petrucci is for anyone who does live streaming*, and topic today was strongly suggesting not to do any packaged, taped stuff in a live stream. I guess you have to cut off the stream when you have to go for a break; and make your life more complicated.

I am not sure if Luria looked at her calendar, but it’s approaching the holiday season ranging from Thanksgiving to Christmas to New Years where people may be on vacation or cannot have a full crew to stream. There are other YouTubers who have done Best of and did a live stream of their stuff (like the Computer Clan’s Krazy Ken who had an open mic for running commentary in the spring.) Rush Limbaugh, Howie Carr, go on tape some days, especially at the end of the year; the FCC doesn’t stop them. Why are livestreamers put to such ridiculous sweat-shop standards when we really should aspire to the blowtorches of Antiquated Modulation (it’s a joke I like AM radio myself!)

*which literally could be anyone; though when watching LSP’s streams, I don’t see focuses on say an influencer, vs a freelance web pundit vs a talk radio with pictures. Something they should look at.

Big Social: they are regulated – to micromanage the users, telling them what’s “right” and “wrong” . The Terms of Services are intentionally vague in Big Tech so they can find ways to punish their users, because punishing users is a form of bullying. If POTUS can do it, why can’t Big Tech bully people too, and if Big Tech can do it, why can joe shomes? Should they be part of the abusive environment too?

Luria was literally looking at Facebook’s Terms of Service; which vaguely  states you can’t run packaged video, or any video clips in a live stream. The live chat was interesting and a lively discussion though, but a few things kinda caught my attention. One was a mention of MySpace as a derogatory stereotype. Another concerning statement was Luria on her air mentioned that has flagged videos that appeared to not be live. One of LSP’s moderators said that too.

When it came to the quasi live/real-time showing of a taped content on YouTube and Facebook…

Asked by your’s truly…she claimed it’s newer feature and mentioned lack of “algorithms”. Regardless of her opinion; it’s been used for many content creators for a while. It’s like a sophicated  scaled watch party (because of chat feature)

Rush Limbaugh, Howie Carr, go on tape some days, especially at the end of the year; the FCC doesn’t stop them. Why are livestreamers put to such ridiculous sweat-shop standards when we really should aspire to the blowtorches of Antiquated Modulation?

My Opinion

I am critical of social media as an institution. I do not like social media micro managing users to use something “they” think is “the right way”… let’s go to the video tape to Eli the Computer Guy… from a couple weeks back

The logic that Luria and the gang have been talking lately with the “policies” on Facebook and YouTube is basically (repeat after me “You Are Not Using Us Properly!”) Anyone who has been in abusive relationships in IT departments, or in other professional relationships get really bummed, and become highly insecure because then they become the individuals who need to know what’s “right” and what’s “wrong”. If anyone who knows the difference between a user of a Macintosh and a PC, the later has been “trained” to do “the right way” while the former group of users was forced to figure themselves out, but what helped them was a more ease of use to self dependency. (This is a metaphor, but the actual sensations of “You’re Not Using Us Properly” by using vague policies such as using B-roll, stingers, or hell a 5 minute break of a last week’s episode of your content would be a “violation”. How the hell can anyone say this is OK?

I put flag-trolling on the level of false 9-1-1 calls and jamming up the community standards system in social media. There is so few that are actually working behind those complaints. Frontline’s episode on the Social Dilemma in the fall of 2018 showed how Facebook was short-staffed during the civil unrests in 2010s not just the last election

In today’s LSP stream, Luria didn’t really offer the navigational alternatives (from what I could tell) to find a happy medium.

With regards to the snooty MySpace reference: Older millennials may remember the days where the “open” architecture where you could put any random code, and some MySpace profiles had either cluttered, browser crashing stylesheets that did make the service look tacky, but the tone of using MySpace as a social level, I will bluntly say it a bit elitist  and degrading to the lower quality people (The Weekly Zoo and the new This Week in Clickford wouldn’t be ashamed to admit.)

Flag-trolling (I wished I used that phrase in the chat): I find it improper to flag videos because of fake or quality; there are more important no-no streams to flag like streams that encourage mass murder or other safety-impacting things that are shown on a platform.

If you are flag-trolling videos on social media, outside of reason; I believe suspend users should be punished. I put flag-trolling on the level of false 9-1-1 calls and jamming up the community standards system in social media. There is so few that are actually working behind those complaints. Frontline’s episode on the Social Dilemma in the fall of 2018 showed how Facebook was short-staffed during the civil unrests in 2010s not just the last election.


With regards to big tech: after this stream, the NASDAQ Composite closed today on one of the largest intraday point gains in recorded history; similar same day performance on the Dow Industrials 20 years ago. This is the first trading day after yesterday’s federal Election. The Big Tech companies were the major drivers to the NASDAQ’s rise today. Why? Because they want gridlock, they don’t want to have governance in D.C. Why? Because tech companies do not want to be broken up or be regulated.

But this “deregulation” is actually a farce; because in reality; they are regulated – to micromanage the users, telling them what’s “right” and “wrong” . The Terms of Services are intentionally vague in Big Tech so they can find ways to punish their users, because punishing users is a form of bullying. If POTUS can do it, why can’t Big Tech bully people too, and if Big Tech can do it, why can joe shomes? Should they be part of the abusive environment too?

The division of our country’s policy is driving addition across all users; which means if there is more time being active to Twitter, Facebook or Google, that means they can make money. Their stocks perform not on financials, but on the technological performance. If division (i.e. intellectual car wrecks) are drawing eyeballs, then this gives them more power.

Before LSP streamed today, I suggested people to dump tech stocks. They need a rude awakening. Section 230 should be revisited; either big tech companies get split up with Consent Decrees; or the government (logically the FTC) should hold the companies behind the platforms more accountable than punishing the users and having them carry unneeded burden of responsibility. If they get regulation; they should read how the the American TV and Radio networks and stations apply quality control known as Standards & Practices not Terms of Service.

I am an American, a fellow American individual to these corporate institutions. I strongly believe in the responsibility of the First Amendment to hold the power accountable. Terms of Service way of controlling content, makes users have to be responsible to a company’s propaganda, not the individual’s liberty. Section 230 basically puts FAANG sector as a commercialized library where the are not supposed to be arbitrary gatekeepers of content; because at that point you’re opening a pandora’s box of libel, defamation and traditional media practices.

Something small as not running taped content on a live stream is entry level way to silence people on the platforms. Copyrighted music was another attempt. This is an assult to the First Amendment, period.

*

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *