>>331022
Unfortunately, Metokur does exactly what Sarkessian does; presents the problem and doesn't attempt to even propose a solution. We certainly need to think of something effective and spread it to those against this (right wing, etc):
Deride, Demote, and Destroy the reputation of "The Big 5" (Google, Youtube, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit). Keep pointing out it's flaws to your peers (online and in real life), and promote other platforms.
There are plenty of other video hosting sites that get no traffic (VidMe, WebmLand, SuperNerdLand etc). We don't need to champion one alternative to Youtube. In fact if we can divide it up, it's better as if it is targeted for a buyout/manipulation/DDOS then people can quickly hop to an alternative. Don't put the eggs all in one basket, and encourage competition between several video websites. As this gets bigger, advertisers will go to those websites, giving them more money allowing them to compete better with more features. We just need to make sure as these websites grow that nothing goes wrong.
Twitter's alternative is Minds, and Voat for Reddit.
Google is more of an issue. Startpage uses Google's results. Bing is fucking useless and owned by Microsoft- so it's the same deal. Metokur proposes a chinese search engine (since while they'll censor shit involving porn and China, they'll happily show Americans being fuck ups).
Facebook is a trickier kettle of fish. It's used to communicate with friends- though in today's age there is no reason people can't just text or use other messaging platforms (I can only think of WhatsApp and I think they are pozzed. Can't remember). However, it's also used to feel good. To stroke the ego and have a celeb lifestyle (though this can also be said of Twitter). How do you have a platform where you make the user base "feel good" when you also want it to be able to show info where shit is fucked? Of course I'm not talking about converting a basic bitch or a jock- but we still need all hands to the pumps.
We DisNod the Big 5.
This one is difficult. However, with how many advertisers pulled out quietly in DisNod Ops, it has more power then we realize.
The Big became more pozzed overtime partly due to emails and complaints of SJWs being offended. We know they are the minority, but as we saw with DisNod on Gaming outlets- 100 emails makes companies feel like there are many more who are about to drop them and just didn't take the time to complain (How many people actually offer feedback nowadays? If you take time to praise, you must really love/loathe what they did).
So, you email companies showing your disgust at what one of the Big 5 are doing. The difficult part is doing it without being too political. "The marxists are controlling the internet" will be ignored. "I don't trust Google/etc as they have removed content that was not harmful." is much better. You don't care what was taken down, it was the fact it was taken down on flimsy reasoning.
One guy emails like that- who cares.
One hundred - that's more of a concern.
One thousand - assuming we can get non-GamerGate but right wing people involved - and you'll have companies pulling out.
An attack on the wallet combined with an attack on the brand while promoting new brands can be devastating. It would need to be constant however- not just a month long thing. It definitely needs to be combined with monthly/weekly email goals (Focusing on one advertiser over one of the big 4 per month/week creating a bigger glut of complaints rather than a steady stream which is easier to wave away).
Now if saying you hate something can get a company to pull - why shouldn't saying you like something get them to work with them? Though rarely done (and something that should be done for the better gaming outlets IMO), telling a brand you like something else is what they want to hear. If you've emailed them, you must be a loyal customer right? And their fancy charts tell them that loyal customers must be a particular demographic. So you telling them you like X platform must mean more people of that demographic are using it as well.
The only risk is coming across like a shill (i.e. like that platform paid you off to pretend to be Joe-public) rather than someone who likes the brand. With many emails from different people written in different ways however, this risk should be mitigated.