For the past few years, YouTube has been one of the main (if not the main) sources of alternative, independent media, a cradle for the revival and expansion of anti-progressive and conservative sentiment. Although the existence of the platform is not the cause of this phenomenon, YouTube constitutes a channel that has facilitated its germination and growth. This has caused an ideological shift in generation Z with respect to the previous generation (Millennials) . So much so that it's being referred to as "the most conservative generation in 70 years".

Recent historical events have caused, for the last decade, a decline in employment and economic comfort (as well as impoverishment) in an important number of western countries. In addition to this, important episodes of mass immigration due to relentless "wars on terror" are shaking western societies, specially in Europe, rising the general discontent of many such countries' citizens.

When a society has plenty of resources and lives generally comfortable from an economic perspective, its people become less interested in history and politics. They are less reactionary, more permissive and welcoming to ideas of openness, inclusiveness, and altruism. Because they don't feel threatened about being taken their levels of comfort from them, domestic conflict becomes rare. The "food coma" of the masses, caused by the plenty, invites them to take long, sweet naps.

However, when times of prosperity end, the opposite occurs. People start to wake up to what they begin to perceive as their increasingly hostile surroundings. Until now, the spreading of ideas and news was slower and less direct, more easily manipulated by whoever wants to control the general narrative.

Here's where platforms like YouTube enter the game. Independent individuals have now a means of spreading their feelings and ideas, and news can be given to a massive audience, first hand, instantly, everywhere.

Of course, this is not a sustainable situation to control the narrative, and it has to be controlled by those who want to keep their positions of power and superiority.

With the recent boycott against YouTube by its biggest sponsors in response to the emergence of "fake news" and other "dangerous phenomena", we are witnessing the first steps to control Google's video platform. But one may ponder: is this enough?

What could be an effective way to convince users and consumers of the platform to welcome more drastic measures in order to keep control of the content that is shared through the platform?

Many reading this may already have an idea of the possible answers to that question.