YouTube Censoring “Dislike Mobs” Following Rewind 2018 Backlash

YouTube doesn’t appreciate their audience feedback. Following years of scandals surrounding data privacy, covert censorship and the promotion of fraudulent advertising scams, the controversial video platform has instead opted to impose new methods which further restrict user freedom rather than addressing their legitimate concerns. The decision to curb the “dislike mobs” came after one of the platform’s official videos, “Rewind 2018”, became the most disliked video in the site’s history.

Over the weekend, YouTube’s director of project management, Tom Leung, released a video revealing the company’s decision to look into changes regarding their video ranking system — which many users suspect could result in the removal of the dislike button altogether. This speculation was finally addressed Leung who acknowledged the feature’s removal would be both “extreme” and “undemocratic,” while also admitting that decision remains under consideration by YouTube’s administrators. Ironically, the video was released purely to generate feedback from their own users — resulting in another onslaught of dislikes from the community.

“Another [option] is requiring more granularity when someone downvotes,” Leung continued. “If you’re going to give a downvote, maybe you have to click a checkbox as to why you don’t like this video. That could give the creator more information, and it would also give viewers pause instead of just doing it impulsively. On the other hand, that’s complicated to build, complicated to collect, and then [complicated] to relay the results to the creator in analytics or Creator Studio… though it gives users pause before disliking instead of just doing it impulsively… [we acknowledge] it’s not as democratic [since] not all dislikes are from dislike mobs.”

This isn’t to say those mobs don’t exist — they’re just a feature of a democratic platform. Over the last few years, it’s fair to say users have been “weaponising” the dislike button as a means of expressing popular opinion. There are few better examples than the backlash against Ghostbusters (2016), the all-female reboot turned box office bomb, which became the most disliked movie trailer in history with over 1.1m dislikes. The most recent example is the “We Believe” video posted by Gillette, the male razor company which tried to celebrate the best of men while also condemning “toxic masculinity”. Instead, the video spawned 1.3m dislikes and became a hot-button target among the reactionary right wanting to build a false narrative of the ad promoting sexism against all men.

The mobs can be ruthless in their judgement — especially when the platform itself became public enemy number one. Within just two months time, Rewind 2018 was able to garner over 15m dislikes and became the most panned video in the history of YouTube’s existence. This wasn’t some expected exercise in needless trolling, but rather a grassroots condemnation of YouTube’s elitist schtick. The Rewind series, which began as a celebration of the platform’s grassroots, decidedly turned into a corporate pitch to establish the site’s marketing power, whether through the use of old media celebrity worship (capitalised through Will Smith, John Oliver and Trevor Noah) or through pre-approved hunky-dory creators with squeaky clean records (such as Casey Neistat and Gabbie Hannah). No acknowledgement of the platforms faults or signs of improvement were made — rightfully pissing off their base of concerned users.

Considering Rewind is worth millions in both production and marketing costs, YouTube clearly has a vested interest to ensure such problematic reactions are curbed by whatever means necessary. Leave users to establish their own free market of content, Rewind pales in comparison to the likes of PewDiePie, the site’s most-famous content creator with a notorious record of political incorrectness, where his alternative parody video saw nowhere near the same audience backlash (7.6M likes to 77k dislikes). Even though it included some of YouTube’s darkest moments such as the infamous suicide forest controversy featuring Logan Paul and the trend of fruitless demonetisation across the board, audiences rewarded creators for acknowledging these unchecked issues and the need for systemic reforms.

The issue isn’t this surge of audience hate, but rather YouTube’s lack of humbled honesty. Should punishment fall upon the audience, stripped of their voice for collective organisation against disagreeable content, or should the platform reconsider why their users are dissatisfied? The value of such viewer organising can’t be understated. Numerous dislikes can prevent videos from showing up in recommended lists, trending lists and can inform both platform and users of genuinely absurd content worthy of critical consideration.

This can lead to a loss in viewership, yes, but should the goal of the platform be the quantity of views rather than the quality of the content? When the goal is profit, the decision is obvious. Audiences, however, aren’t driven by such greed. There’s a need to create these cultural discussions, highlighting which videos are worthy of the backlash compared to others. YouTube’s removal of the feature would be a grave mistake that will only not further toxify the comments sections we’re notoriously told to avoid — it’ll just confirm YouTube’s disdain for their audiences’ opinions.

Thanks for reading! This article was originally published for, a bipartisan media platform for political and social commentary, truly diverse viewpoints and facts that don’t kowtow to political correctness.

Bailey Steen is a journalist, graphic designer and film critic residing in the heart of Australia. You can also find his work right here on Medium and publications such as Janks Reviews.

For updates, feel free to follow @atheist_cvnt on his various social media pages on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram or Gab. You can also contact through for personal or business reasons.

Stay honest and radical. Cheers, darlings. 💋

troubled writer, depressed slug, bisexual simp, neoliberal socialist, trotskyist-bidenist, “corn-pop was a good dude, actually,” bio in pronouns: (any/all)

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store