In a significant policy shift, YouTube announced it wouldn’t remove content suggesting that fraud, errors, or glitches occurred in the 2020 US Presidential and other US elections.

The company confirmed this reversal of its election integrity policy on Friday.

In this article, we’re diving deep into YouTube’s decision. What led to this point?

It’s not just YouTube, though. We’re seeing this delicate dance all around the tech world. Platforms are trying to figure out how to let people express themselves without letting misinformation run wild.

Look at this balancing act and how it’s playing out.

A Shift Towards Free Speech?

YouTube first implemented its policy against election misinformation in December 2020, once several states certified the 2020 election results.

The policy aimed to prevent the spread of misinformation that could incite violence or cause real-world harm.

However, the company is concerned that maintaining this policy may have the unintended effect of stifling political speech.

Reflecting on the impact of the policy over the past two years, which led to tens of thousands of video removals, YouTube states:

“Two years, tens of thousands of video removals, and one election cycle later, we recognized it was time to reevaluate the effects of this policy in today’s changed landscape. With that in mind, and with 2024 campaigns well underway, we will stop removing content that advances false claims that widespread fraud, errors, or glitches occurred in the 2020 and other past US Presidential elections.”

In the coming months, YouTube promises more details about its approach to the 2024 election.

Other Misinformation Policies Unchanged

While this change shifts YouTube’s approach to election-related content, it doesn’t impact other misinformation policies.

YouTube clarifies:

“The rest of our election misinformation policies remain in place, including those that disallow content aiming to mislead voters about the time, place, means, or eligibility requirements for voting; false claims that could materially discourage voting, including those disputing the validity of voting by mail; and content that encourages others to interfere with democratic processes.”

The Greater Context: Balancing Free Speech and Misinformation

This decision occurs in a broader context where media companies and tech platforms are wrestling with the balance between curbing misinformation and upholding freedom of speech.

With that in mind, there are several implications for advertisers and content creators.

Implications For Advertisers

• Brand Safety Concerns: Advertisers may be concerned about their ads appearing alongside content that spreads election misinformation.
• Increased Scrutiny: With this change, advertisers may have to scrutinize more closely where their ads are being placed.
• Potential for Boycotts: If certain brands’ advertisements are repeatedly seen on videos spreading election misinformation, it could lead to consumer boycotts.

Implications For Content Creators

• Monetization Opportunities: This could open up new monetization opportunities for content creators who focus on political content, particularly those previously penalized under the old policy.
• Increased Viewership: If their content is no longer being removed, specific creators might see an increase in viewership, leading to higher ad revenue and more engagement.
• Potential Backlash: On the flip side, content creators could face backlash from viewers who disagree with the misinformation or those who feel the platform should be taking a stronger stand against such content.

It’s important to note these are potential implications and may not be realized universally across the platform.

The impact will likely vary based on specific content, audience demographics, advertiser preferences, and other factors.

In Summary

YouTube’s decision showcases the ongoing struggle to balance freedom of speech and prevent misinformation.

If you’re an advertiser on the platform, remember to be vigilant about where your ads are placed.

For content creators, this change could be a double-edged sword. While it may bring more ad revenue to YouTube, there’s a risk of viewers perceiving the ads as spreading misinformation.

As participants in the digital world, we should all strive for critical thinking and fact-checking when consuming content. The responsibility to curb misinformation doesn’t rest solely with tech platforms – it’s a collective task we all share.

Source: YouTube

Featured image generated by the author using Midjourney. 

A serious hacking attack has been exploiting ecommerce websites to steal credit card information from users and to spread the attack to other websites.

These hacking attacks are called Magecart style skimmer and it’s spreading worldwide across multiple ecommerce platforms.

Attackers are targeting a variety of ecommerce platforms:

• Magento
• Shopify
• WooCommerce
• WordPress

What Does the Attack Do?

The attackers have two goals when infecting a website:

1. Use the site to spread itself to other sites

2. Steal personal information like credit card data from customers of the infected website.

Identifying a vulnerability is difficult because the code dropped on a website is encoded and sometimes masked as a Google Tag or a Facebook Pixel code.

What the code does however is target input forms for credit card information.

It also serves as an intermediary to carry out attacks on behalf of the attacker, thus covering up the true source of the attacks.

Magecart Style Skimmer

A Magecart attack is an attack that enters through an existing vulnerability on the ecommerce platform itself.

On WordPress and WooCommerce it could be a vulnerability in a theme or plugin.

On Shopify it could an existing vulnerability in that platform.

In all cases, the attackers are taking advantage of vulnerabilities that are present in the platform the ecommerce sites are using.

This is not a case where there is one single vulnerability that can be conveniently fixed. It’s a wide range of them.

The report by Akamai states:

“Before the campaign can start in earnest, the attackers will seek vulnerable websites to act as “hosts” for the malicious code that is used later on to create the web skimming attack.

…Although it is unclear how these sites are being breached, based on our recent research from similar, previous campaigns, the attackers will usually look for vulnerabilities in the targeted websites’ digital commerce platform (such as Magento, WooCommerce, WordPress, Shopify, etc.) or in vulnerable third-party services used by the website.”

Recommended Action

Akamai recommends that all Ecommerce users secure their websites. That means making sure all third party apps and plugins are updated and that the platform is the very latest version.

They also recommend using a Web Application Firewall (WAF), which detects and prevents intrusions when hackers are probing a site in search of a vulenerable website.

Users of platforms like WordPress have multiple security solutions, with popular and trusted ones being Sucuri Security (website hardening) and WordFence (WAF).

Akamai recommends:

“…the complexity, deployment, agility, and distribution of current web application environments — and the various methods attackers can use to install web skimmers — require more dedicated security solutions, which can provide visibility into the behavior of scripts running within the browser and offer defense against client-side attacks.

An appropriate solution must move closer to where the actual attack on the clients occurs. It should be able to successfully identify the attempted reads from sensitive input fields and the exfiltration of data (in our testing we employed Akamai Page Integrity Manager).

We recommend that these events are properly collected in order to facilitate fast and effective mitigation.”

Read the original report for more details:

New Magecart-Style Campaign Abusing Legitimate Websites to Attack Others

Google Search Advocate, John Mueller, has shed light on the difference between generic top-level domains (gTLDs) and country code top-level domains (ccTLDs), offering practical advice to businesses and SEO professionals.

His comments arrive amidst the recent update by Google that categorizes .ai domains as gTLDs, moving away from their previous association with Anguilla, a British Overseas Territory in the Eastern Caribbean.

Understanding The gTLD & ccTLD Distinction

A website owner in a Reddit thread on the r/SEO forum asks about the SEO implications of choosing country-specific domains.

Responding to the thread, Mueller notes that ccTLDs, such as .nl, .fr, and .de, are advantageous if a business is targeting customers in that region.

However, for those aiming for a global market or targeting a different country than the ccTLD suggests, a gTLD or the relevant ccTLD might be a better choice.

Mueller explains:

“The main thing I’d watch out for is ccTLD (“country code” — like nl, fr, de) vs gTLD (“generic” – com, store, net, etc). ccTLDs tend to focus on one country, which is fine if you plan on mostly selling in that country, or if you want to sell globally. If you mostly want to target another country (like “nationwi.de” but you want to target the US), then make sure to get either that ccTLD or a gTLD.”

He further clarifies that new TLDs are all classified as gTLDs. Even those that seem geographically specific, like “.berlin,” are technically not considered ccTLDs.

Mueller continues:

“All of the new TLDs are gTLDs, for what it’s worth — some sound geo-specific, but they’re technically not (like “.berlin” — it’s a gTLD). Apart from ccTLD vs gTLD for SEO, there’s also the user-aspect to think about: will they click on a link that they perceive to be for users in another country?”

In another similar thread, Mueller warns against selecting TLDs predominantly used by spammers:

“From an SEO POV, I would just not pick a TLD that’s super-cheap and over-run with spam.” This comment underlines the importance of considering the reputation of TLDs when strategizing for SEO.

Google’s .ai Domain Update

Google recently updated its help documentation, specifying that it now treats .ai domain names as a gTLD, similar to .com, .org, and others.

This means Google Search won’t consider .ai domains geo-specific to Anguilla.

Gary Illyes from the Google Search Relations team provides the reason behind the change:

“We won’t infer the target country from the ccTLD so targeting Anguilla became a little harder, but then again there are barely any .ai domains that try to do that anyway.”

This update is significant for businesses and SEO professionals previously avoiding the use of .ai domain names for fear of Google associating them with Anguilla.

The new classification removes the concerns, and such domains can now be used without the worry of geo-specific targeting by Google’s algorithms.

In Summary

Choosing the right domain, whether country-specific (ccTLD) or generic (gTLD), makes a difference in reaching the right audience.

A ccTLD could be a good fit if a business mainly targets customers in a specific country. A gTLD might be a better choice if the goal is to reach a broader, global audience.

Additionally, it’s a good idea to avoid spammy TLDs that hurt your site’s reputation.

Mueller’s comments are a good reminder of the strategic decisions in registering your domain.

Featured image generated by the author using Midjourney.