There has been a blog written about this whole disaster featuring Mysterious Matters and Bob Bain as an example. This is a good read, and explains what our podcasters are up against right now. BTW, Bob doesn't know this writer.
http://www.starmythworld.com/mathisencorollary/2017/4/20/bd2b086ufbbkb8lfy0pletdtuwocwa
I've previously posted about my belief in the importance of regularly tuning in to independent or alternative media sources, as well as providing support (if possible) to alternative media that you find valuable. See for example this post from November, 2016, entitled "
Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the past" (a title taken from a line in George Orwell's
Nineteen Eighty-Four).
Above is a short message from Bob Bain, host of the
Mysterious Matters podcast (you can listen to the message via iTunes by following
this link and looking for the "Future of Mysterious Matters message posted on April 14, 2017).
In it, Bob describes the devastating financial impact on content creators who rely on ad revenues sold by Google-Alphabet against YouTube videos that the content creators post, due to Google-Alphabet's response to complaints from some corporate ad buyers about totally unrelated content, which led to ads being pulled (by Google) from all kinds of other content creators (such as
Mysterious Matters) deemed to be "on the fringe" in any way.
Content creators such as Bob, whose
Mysterious Matters podcast has tens of thousands of followers, can generate ad revenues by allowing Google's YouTube to sell ads against that content. Those paying for the ads don't know what content their ads will be sold against, and those providing the content (such as Bob) don't know what ads will be placed on their videos. Therefore, when some corporations paying for ads told Google's YouTube that they were unhappy about the content (videos) that some of their ads appeared against, Google responded by pulling ads from a wide swath of content creators -- including
Mysterious Matters.
Apparently, hosting interviews with guests who discuss
techniques for inducing lucid dreaming, or the
relative merits of various "ancient alien" theories, or
paranormal encounters from the state of Tennessee, is now categorized as being as "potentially objectionable" as incendiary, racist, or misogynistic content. I certainly have not listened to every interview Bob Bain has ever done, but those I have listened to are enough for me to feel safe in saying that he does not deserve categorization as "objectionable content" -- and in fact he does not even curse on his show (except very rarely and reluctantly and when he is really upset about something) and most of his podcasts are rated as "clean" in iTunes.
The fact is that there has been a sudden and fairly massive push to identify everything that is an "alternative" to
the dominant neoliberal and neoconservative paradigm or worldview advanced by the corporate-sponsored media outlets as being racist or incendiary or misogynistic -- a weaponization of the term "alternative" which recalls the deliberate weaponization of the terms "conspiracy theory" as a way of stifling the proliferation of dissenting voices in the united states in the wake of the Warren Commission that was supposed to investigate the John Kennedy assassination.
Threats to the economic viability and survivability of alternative sources of information is a very serious subject, as discussed in the blog post linked above whose title comes from an Orwell quotation. The need to have avenues and sources of information that are beyond the tremendous monetary influence of massive corporate interests should be a concern of everyone who values the open investigation of explanations for the evidence we see in the world around us which might not be popular or which might not serve the interests of certain industries (or which might in fact expose wrongdoing by certain powerful persons or business interests).
Ultimately, the ability to construct a "narrative" or a "paradigm" to "excuse or to (supposedly) "justify" certain practices is an essential aspect of getting away with fraudulent, oppressive, or criminal behavior -- and thus everyone who opposes oppression should recognize the importance of investigating and "trying on" alternative paradigms and frameworks that might better explain the events of the past -- and the present.
If fewer people can find a way to provide independent platforms for independent voices to be heard, the result is unquestionably negative and detrimental to open discourse and critical thinking -- and open discourse and critical thinking are vital to democratic society (and anathema to oppressive regimes, as Orwell demonstrated so memorably in his writing).
There are other ways to support such independent media sources besides the ad-based model, of course -- as Bob says in the address above, he made the mistake of relying on ads sold against his many YouTube views, and he won't make that mistake again. In the meantime, he notes that any donations to help replace the sudden loss of ad revenues are appreciated. I would urge anyone who listens to his show to try to do so, if possible)
Kudos to Bob for explaining what is going on and the impact it is having in such a clear and concise way -- I myself don't have any ad-based revenue and so I was unaware of the impact of this recent development.
Full story at site.