Not everyone was happy with the decision to remove the "dislike" count from all videos on the platform.
Jawed Karim is a critic.
In 2005, he founded the video sharing site with Steve Chen and Chad Hurley. If you're not familiar with any of the three YouTube co-workers, you've probably seen a video of Karim.
That's because the first-ever video uploaded to a video sharing website, "Me at the zoo," was uploaded by Karim. The 18-second video has more than 200 million views and features a man talking to a camera about elephants.
The video description is very new and may be more than 16 years old. The historic old video is being used by the YouTube cofounder to protest the removal of the dislike count from videos.
"Why would YouTube make this universally disliked change?" asks Karim in the description. There is a reason, but it's not a good one and not one that will be made public. There will be references to other studies. Studies that are contrary to the common sense of every YouTuber.
The removal of dislikes was explained by the company as it deterred "dislike mobs" who would hit the thumbs down button on a video. There have been a few conspiracy theories surrounding this decision, but he never specifies which one.
The dislike feature was part of a process that worked, according to the man.
The process breaks when the platform messes with it. The platform invariably declines. Is YouTube going to become a place where everything is mediocre? Nothing can be great if nothing is bad.
It's not the first time that YouTube has made a change to its rating system. There was a 5-star rating system when the video platform was founded by Karim. In 2009, the search engine removed the 5-star system from the site, in favor of the "thumbs up" and "thumbs down" buttons.
It should be noted that the public dislike counts are being removed. Users will still be able to dislike a video if they don't like it.
This isn't the first time Jawed has used a video to voice his displeasure with a company decision. He protested against the requirement to have an account with the social network in order to leave comments.
The founder of the video-sharing website edited it after he voiced his disapproval and said removing dislikes is a stupid idea. Try again.
The removal of the dislike count can be read in full by Karim.
I thought something was off when Matt Koval announced the removal of dislikes.
>
The words didn't match the eyes. The video reminded me of a 1966 interview with the admiral. I've never seen an announcement of something that is supposed to be great more enthusiastic.
>
It's not possible to call the removal of dislikes a good thing for creators without conflict. We know this because there is no one who thinks removing dislikes is a good idea.
>
Why would this change be universally disliked? There is a reason, but it is not a good one and will not be made public. There will be references to other studies. The studies seem to disagree with the common sense of every YouTuber.
>
The ability to quickly identify bad content is an essential feature of a user-generated content platform. Why? Some user-generated content is not good. It can't be. Most of it isn't good. That's okay. The idea was not that all content is good. There are great creations waiting to be exposed among the flood of content. The stuff that is not great has to fall quickly.
>
The process works, and there's a name for it: the wisdom of the crowds. The process stops when the platform messes with it. The platform always declines. Is YouTube going to become a place where everything is mediocre? If nothing is good, it can be great.
>
"Make it better" is the most important thing in business. "Don't fuck it up".
