1. Corey on January 2, 2006 11:36 AM writes...

This is over a week old. Myspace has already explained that this was merely a confusion on their part and they have fixed the problem. Quit jumping to conclusions on week old information in your inbox before you analyze the evidence (why not check youtube).

2. Eric on January 2, 2006 11:50 AM writes...

In regards to the first comment. They have claimed it was a mistake AFTER everyone rebelled at what MySpace had done.

They are just trying to recover their $ 580 million purchase price and they are taking no prisoners.

Myself and a friend have attempted to see what happens if you are banned from the forums. Nothing, you get no warning whatsoever until you click and suddenly have an error directing you to tech support. And it's not like they ever respond to any email you will ever send them.

No customer service and playing Big Brother is a recipe for disaster.

3. Corey on January 2, 2006 12:01 PM writes...

With over 40 million registered users I can imagine how hard it would be to pay customer service reps to call the very people that are violating your terms of service and costing you more money to fix what they've done. If you knew you were doing something wrong you shouldn't need a lecture from Myspace...they simply ban you...and I would do the same.

I explained to Dana that the algorithm they had in place might have unintentionally blocked YouTube URL's because they matched a certain pattern (not having an actual file name with an extension). Tom told YouTube he was sorry for the misunderstanding and fixed it...hardly something that most CEO's would do if they just blocked a competitor intentionally.

4. Corey on January 2, 2006 12:07 PM writes...

And if you missed it before, Myspace is primarily 13-30 year old's...weighing heavily towards the younger side of that scale. These kids don't so much care about customer service, not that they deserve to be fed with a silver spoon by Myspace because they signed up for a free site.

You get what you pay for. In myspace's case, you get a lot more. People should value that; not bitch they don't get a Lexus and an iPod for signing up.

5. Brad Hutchings on January 3, 2006 12:23 AM writes...

Corey,

Take some solace in this recent quote:

Analysts cover the story. They may or may not admit to error, but they write through the pain. The real journalists among them put their feelings about the event completely aside, they go into the winner's locker room, they get the quotes, they describe what happened, and (based on the facts they gathered) they help the reader or viewer understand what may happen next.

The advocates drift away. They change the subject. They're full of "oh, yeah" because they were never in the fight to begin with, just in the crowd.

A real journalist would have contacted someone at MySpace to get a quote, and if they didn't respond in whatever timeframe, would have noted that MySpace did not respond to queries regarding the issue. Even Jason Blaire went to the effort to make up quotes from both sides.

6. David on January 3, 2006 05:06 AM writes...

Who's the idiot here Dana? You posted "news" that is over a week old, and it's inaccurate. MySpace is not blocking YouTube, and hasn't for 10 days. MySpace HAS blocked flash embeds for security reasons at least 3 times I'm aware of. And everytime they fix the problem, they turn them back on. This may have been the issue with YouTube, or it may have been adult content in their videos. If you'd bothered to even read the full blog you were quoting, they've corrected their error:

http://technoflak.blogspot.com/2006/01/lesson-for-murdoch-keep-bloggers-happy.html

And YouTube has publicly announced that their false claims of censorship were simply a misunderstanding. See here: http://youtube.com/blog

Ah, but such is life in the blogosphere. "Journaliss" who can say whatever they want because they dont have to hold themself to any standards.

7. Alice Marshall on January 5, 2006 11:23 PM writes...

" If you'd bothered to even read the full blog you were quoting, they've corrected their error:"

The correction was made after Dana published this post and after I read the comments here.

The original story linked on my blog came from the NY Times. Sigh. Live 'n learn.

8. David on January 7, 2006 07:09 AM writes...

Thanks Alice, that's commendable of you. But notice Dana hasn't changed his blog. And the fact that your blog, and his, and many others are still up is what sucks about the blogosphere.

People post rants against things without checking facts, and those rants remain big & bold, the only thing people ntoice. That's what makes the headline. Who ever reads the comments to find out the rants were not based in fact?

Now print journalists (i.e. the journalist from the NYT) in an attempt to be hip and current, print the misinformation they find in blogs.

9. Alice Marshall on January 8, 2006 09:13 PM writes...

The Independent is running the same story, with this comment from a NewsCorp flack:

A spokesman for MySpace said it would not explain how the blocking of YouTube came about, nor how it was resolved, nor whether in future it would continue to block links to rival websites or censor messages between MySpace customers.