Daily Times

While the digital media has equipped several people to have a voice and freely express their views, it comes with a cost. Some times that cost of compromising the privacy of your data other times it is strings like being censored.

YouTube, YouTubing and vlogging has become a part of pop culture now – a phenomenon that has motivated amateurs to also aspire to become successful YouTubers and earn a fortune. Anyone who can create original video content that the internet audience is willing to consume can be a YouTuber.

But what happens when an angry vlogger believing to be wronged by a social media company takes things in own hands and plans a revenge?

At least three people were wounded out of which one went into critical condition after 39-year-old animal rights and vegan lifestyle vlogger entered the YouTube headquarters on Wednesday with a gun and opened fire before shooting herself dead.

Aghdam said she contacted YouTube asking why one of her abs workout videos was age-restricted and was told by YouTube that it was because it was ‘inappropriate’ for children. It can be seen in one of her videos that she was extremely unhappy about it

Nasim Aghdam’scontention which turned into resentment was being hit by YouTube’s recent policies which were intended to prevent abuse of their partner/revenue sharing programme to make it more efficient and friendly for original content creators.

In videos she posted on her social media accounts on Instagram, Facebook and Telegram, she expressed how she detested YouTube’s curbs on her channel and believed she was censored and suppressed – something she believed was conspired by pharmaceutical industry to prevent her from ‘promoting healthy lifestyle’.

She said in one of her anti-YouTube videos that her channel used to attract several views until YouTube’s decided to ‘censor’ them, adding that she tried to fight by creating multiple channels but those also met the same fate.

Aghdam said she contacted YouTube asking why one of her abs workout videos was age-restricted and was told by YouTube that it was because it was ‘inappropriate’ for children. It can be seen in one of her videos that she was extremely unhappy about it.

She regularly claimed the criteria for the video sharing sites like YouTube wasn’t fair as it didn’t give equal treatment to everyone. She maintained that it’s YouTube that decides who gets the views and who doesn’t and that it decides on the basis of whether it benefits them or not.

While the police haven’t officially ruled it as the motive of the shooting, it is quite clear the vlogger was disgruntled of how she was being treated by the Google-owned video sharing giant.

As soon as the news of the ‘shooting situation’ at the YouTube headquarters in California emerged, it had us all concerned and praying for the safety of everyone. I was relieved after the whole thing was over because anyone can tell the situation could have been much worse.

This is also a stark reminder of America’s gun problem that probably won’t go away anytime soon. Until then, measures have to be taken both by the law enforcement and the social media companies themselves to prevent their employees from facing wrath of angry and harmful users.

The writer is the Digital Editor, Daily Times and can be reached at me@farhanjanjua.com. He tweets and instagrams @FarhanJanjua

Published in Daily Times, April 6^th 2018.