YouTube Videos Could Get Demonetized If They Have 'Inappropriate Comments' 347
In response to a mother's inquiry into why her son's gymnastics videos were deemed not advertiser friendly, YouTube said on Twitter it has "taken a number of actions to better protect the YouTube community from content that endangers minors." The video-sharing website went on to say something very concerning for anyone who has ever uploaded a video to the site: "... even if your video is suitable for advertisers, inappropriate comments could result in your video receiving limited or no ads (yellow icon)."
Essentially, what YouTube is saying is that if someone leaves a "incendiary or demeaning" comment, or one with "inappropriate language," the video which features that comment could get demonetized and the content creator would not generate money from it. If you've ever read a comment thread on YouTube, it shouldn't take long for you to realize how big of an issue this could become. According to YouTube's "advertiser-friendly content guidelines," the following content may not be suitable for most advertisers: "controversial issues and sensitive events," "drugs and dangerous products or substances," "harmful or dangerous acts," "harmful or dangerous acts," "hateful content," "inappropriate language," "inappropriate use of family entertainment characters," "incendiary and demeaning [content]," "sexually suggestive content," and/or "violence."
The best advice for circumventing this issue is to disable comments entirely, but this would significantly reduce the interaction between the YouTuber and the viewer. "If this is our new reality we're going to need the ability to restrict comments from accounts under 1-4 weeks old," says news commentator and YouTube personality Philip DeFranco. "Sounds like this is prime for weaponization. Also it would probably be best to have an official blog post instead of my tweet as a reference for this change."
Essentially, what YouTube is saying is that if someone leaves a "incendiary or demeaning" comment, or one with "inappropriate language," the video which features that comment could get demonetized and the content creator would not generate money from it. If you've ever read a comment thread on YouTube, it shouldn't take long for you to realize how big of an issue this could become. According to YouTube's "advertiser-friendly content guidelines," the following content may not be suitable for most advertisers: "controversial issues and sensitive events," "drugs and dangerous products or substances," "harmful or dangerous acts," "harmful or dangerous acts," "hateful content," "inappropriate language," "inappropriate use of family entertainment characters," "incendiary and demeaning [content]," "sexually suggestive content," and/or "violence."
The best advice for circumventing this issue is to disable comments entirely, but this would significantly reduce the interaction between the YouTuber and the viewer. "If this is our new reality we're going to need the ability to restrict comments from accounts under 1-4 weeks old," says news commentator and YouTube personality Philip DeFranco. "Sounds like this is prime for weaponization. Also it would probably be best to have an official blog post instead of my tweet as a reference for this change."
Of course Brin & company will... (Score:5, Insightful)
...have no problem collecting 100% of the ad money. They will still run the ad and bill for it, it's just a new way to stiff you out of the money.
Re: Of course Brin & company will... (Score:5, Insightful)
If they can detect those comments... Why not just hide the offensive comments ???
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
They already massively shadow ban (i.e. comments just visible to yourself if logged in). Log out and they are not there, No explanation no indication this has happened. Worse it seems to happen particularly if you have a polite comment backed by links etc. that is considered wrongthink. But you can still see all comments like "kill all....", direct insults and the conspiracies. Total shit.
Re: Of course Brin & company will... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Perhaps your comments were moderated instead of deleted by Youtube's algorithm
Re: Of course Brin & company will... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Of course Brin & company will... (Score:5, Insightful)
all the paid Trump propagandists
It is actually possible for real people to support the current US President. I mean, shit, he did win the election.
Maybe, just possibly, those 'propagandists' happen to be 'people with whom you disagree' and not paid astroturfers at all.
Indeed, it's the most likely explanation.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
My solution is to use YT-Adblockers and instead pay the content providers I like directly.
FUYT
Re: (Score:3)
YouTube Red / Premium is basically that plus some paywalled content. If everyone paid for it, advertisers wouldn't have a say in how YouTube operates anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
It is not a common pile.
My understanding is that content creators get half of YouTube revenue for that video:
- For ads, they get half of what the announcers pay for the specific ads showns on your video, the number of views is far from being the only factor: the value of the ads shown, the proportion of people using adblockers, etc... It is extremely unstable and tends to drive YouTubers mad.
- For Red/Premium, they get half of the subscription, weighted by watch time. Ads are of course irrelevant because Re
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with direct payments is that the minimum amount due to processing fees is too high.
There is no middle ground between watching an ad for 5 seconds and donating $1.00 (of which about $0.30 gets to the creator). People would pay $0.01 to view if they could (which is more than the ad pays), but there is simply no way for them to do it.
YouTube could fix it by having a monthly "tip jar". You put in however much you want, and then get to watch videos ad free with the creator getting a cent or two each
Re: (Score:2)
This is what Twitch does with their Bits system. It doesn't take much to toss in a few bits towards a channel that you like.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. I don't know why you were modded down - this is exactly what will happen, and gives the lie to whatever "hate free zone" smokescreen they might construct as justification.
Re: (Score:2)
YouTube/Google Monetizing algorithm is messed up. However, the public outcry when offensive information and there is a post making money, that is breaking copyright laws... Is also bad for the company.
The biggest problem with social media is the fact that all the content is user created, and it is nearly impossible to police and follow the rules set up for the broadcast industry. For the broadcast industry, there is only 24 hours of content to monitor. This could mean for a full day to live TV there needs
Re: (Score:3)
Your making a critical mistake in understanding this. Youtube viewers are not the consumer. Youtube viewers are the product. Your eyeballs , watching youtube advertisements are what is sold to the real consumer, Youtube Advertisers.
This is true of almost all entertainment economies since we first learned to reproduce performance with the advent of the printing pre
Happy Friday From The Golden Girls! (Score:4, Funny)
I hole-hardedly agree, but allow me to play doubles advocate here for a moment. For all intensive purposes I think you are wrong. In an age where false morals are a diamond dozen, true virtues are a blessing in the skies. We often put our false morality on a petal stool like a bunch of pre-Madonnas, but you all seem to be taking something very valuable for granite. So I ask of you to mustard up all the strength you can because it is a doggy dog world out there. Although there is some merit to what you are saying it seems like you have a huge ship on your shoulder. In your argument you seem to throw everything in but the kids Nsync, and even though you are having a feel day with this I am here to bring you back into reality. I have a sick sense when it comes to these types of things. It is almost spooky, because I cannot turn a blonde eye to these glaring flaws in your rhetoric. I have zero taller ants when it comes to people spouting out hate in the name of moral righteousness. You just need to remember what comes around is all around, and when supply and command fails you will be the first to go. Make my words, when you get down to brass stacks it doesn't take rocket appliances to get two birds stoned at once. It's clear who makes the pants in this relationship, and sometimes you just have to swallow your prize and accept the facts. You might have to come to this conclusion through denial and error but I swear on my mother's mating name that when you put the petal to the medal you will pass with flying carpets like it's a peach of cake.
Re: (Score:2)
Ricky get off of slashdot.
Re:Happy Friday From The Golden Girls! (Score:4, Funny)
I hole-hardedly agree,
Just for your future reference, the phrase is whole-heartedly.. I.e. you agree with your whole heart.
So, is that the *only* one you're going to correct? Did you even read the rest of it?
Golden Age is Over. (Score:4, Interesting)
Making a business or any sort of living as a content creator on YouTube seems to be coming rather quickly to an end if this rule takes hold.
Then again, maybe all that will be left on YouTube are those that do this as a passion project and not expect to make money from it... Those that are only in it for the money will quickly move on to something perhaps more profitable.
Re:No worries, (Score:2)
Re:No worries, (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Don't worry. Those that really just do it for the money (and I mean big money) will find a way around it. Those that do it as a passion project are few, far between, and usually about as entertaining and interesting as all the other "let's play" videos.
What we'll really lose is the ones that have a passion, want to show, teach, inform and share their knowledge and need to make at least a bit of revenue to make it work out. I.e. the only thing still worth going to YT for.
Re:Golden Age is Over. (Score:4, Informative)
Most of mine already have a Patreon. That and sponsored videos seem to be most of their revenue.
Nobody depends on AdSense revenue since at least the Adpocylypse.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And this is why crypto-currencies will take over for YouTube channel financing.
Contamination Spreads (Score:4, Interesting)
You might feel your content is safe, and it is just those "bad" people who disagree with you get silenced. The problem is that when bad means disagree, you can find yourself suddenly on the wrong side very quickly.
Free speech is the hardest thing, because it means defending the right of someone to say something that is completely annoying to you. It goes against human nature, which makes it one of the great intellectual achievements of humans.
Ironically, you might not see this post because my karma is bad. My karma is bad because I said some very, very critical things about the slashdot community chasing politics over the quest for science. Even here, censorship happens.
Good grief (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Can't do that. That requires adulthood and actual initiative.
Everyone MUST be coddled and saved from everything, including themselves!
All this really is, is another push at screwing content creators out of their cut.
Re: Good grief (Score:4, Informative)
Re: Good grief (Score:5, Insightful)
I understand.
I also understand that a content creator could do NOTHING WRONG, and could still have legitimate videos demonetized through no fault of their own.
Simply because some jackass puts up a comment.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, that's the current environment advertisers are finding. Remember yesterday when a bunch of advertisers pulled out because of a pedophile ring in the comments?
Guess what? When advertisers pull out, videos get demonetized. So just because some jerkoff manages to jerk off to your video causes advertiser
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Good grief (Score:5, Interesting)
Demonetized videos still show ads: YouTube keep 100%.
The whole system is rigged against the content creators and the only option is to not play the game.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Of course if no one see the content, well advertisers are paying for nothing. Just another scam by google to reduce outgoings, what is bad language in one tongue is just an expletive in another. So from an Australian perspective, you scummy pack of Alphabet cunts, stop pushing your fucking bullshit on the rest of the world, seriously go fuck yourselves. All legal words in Australia and Google can eat a dead dogs dick.
Re: Good grief (Score:5, Funny)
The problem is the left and the right which make up 98% of the world are just nuts and demand this sort of bull shit. Advertisers responded. YouTube responded. The 3% who are not nut jobs and want freedom over safety are working on moving to New Hampshire and organizing a free state to be less harmed by the nuts jobs everywhere else.
Yes, you're 101% correct.
Re: (Score:3)
You just demonstrated that 77.8769% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
You've got it backwards - it's the 3% fringe that are the problem.
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't about kids seeing comments (Score:3)
This isn't about comments that they don't want kids to see.
This is about some really messed up stuff that happens with the algorithm for recommending videos and comments certain people post on videos of kids. It's a messed up situation that needs to be addressed somehow. Hopefully YouTube will come up with better solutions.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Want to make a video on a political topic? Nope, that's getting demonitized. Can't take a chance that someone sees and ad next to a video of something that might offend them.
Advertisers can rest easy then. They don't have to worry about me ever affiliating them with a topic or viewpoint they don't want to be, since I don't see any of the ads on YouTube anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, haven't seen an ad on youtube in years. Don't miss em either. I sometimes feel bad for the creators, then I remember they know what they signed up for. Ads ruined the internet and are an additional attack vector.
Re: (Score:2)
This is likely in response to the recent discovery that pedophilia groups were making comments that effectively "tagged" the video and what point to skip to in it, for particular tastes to be fulfilled. A child's gymnastic video would most likely fit in that category.
They had a few major advertisers pull their ads for this reason.
Ultimately, the comment section is up to the video owner to police, it seems.
Re: (Score:2)
They don't care about protecting the children, they care about protecting their ad revenue!
Advertisers can make any arbitrary demands they want, and YouTube is reliant on ads for most of its income so has little choice but to comply.
This is very very bad because it makes it easy for anyone to force channels to disable comments (and thus reduce their income due to decreased engagement, resulting in decreased recommendation and views) or lose their monetization.
Re: (Score:2)
I rarely watch videos with comments disabled, because then there's no way to find out in advance that the critical parts of the video were filmed through a potato, that the audio is 1.5 s out of sync, that another version is available without all the problems, that the most improbable sequence on a blooper real was actually filmed as a commercial (even if never aired), or where to find the associated PDF of a technical talk, etc. etc.
But I suppose I rely more on comments than most people, because I never su
Re: (Score:2)
If they're so obsessed about "protecting the children", then just hide and disable comments across the entire site on the Youtube Kids interface. Then it's just up to the parents to ensure that Youtube is locked in the Kids mode on their devices.
You're assuming this is about "the children" when it's actually about Alphabet reducing the number of things they could be potentially sued for.
So anybody can now sabotage any video? (Score:5, Insightful)
That will work out well. Everybody on YouTube, no matter how nice or friendly, has enemies. There are a lot of dissatisfied, cruel, envious and stupid people around and also some outright psychos. If these people now get handed a Really Big Stick, they are going to use it.
On the plus-side, this extreme stupidity hopefully will hasten the demise of YouTube. It has vastly overstayed its welcome anyways.
Re:So anybody can now sabotage any video? (Score:5, Insightful)
How long until 4chan weaponizes this with a comment posting script to attack ALL of Youtube at once?
Random video, random comment from random account containing a bunch of random keywords. BOOM.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed.
Re: (Score:2)
Hopefully the googles at 4chan will have waymo fun time.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, yes. But now anybody can do it in a minute with minimal effort.
Morton's Fork (Score:3)
So Youtubers uploading videos of minors are going to have to choose between no comments or no monetization? This'll doom channels that are specifically about audience participation, like "leave a comment about what you want me to do in my next video". This'll push more Youtube content creators to accept kickbacks from companies to shill their products, rather than being able to rely on monetization and potentially remain unbiased.
Re:Morton's Fork (Score:5, Insightful)
This'll doom channels that are specifically about audience participation, like "leave a comment about what you want me to do in my next video".
If only there was a way for viewers to send comments and suggestions directly to the content maker, like sending a letter in the mail. We could call it "electronic mail" People could have addresses where such "e-mail" could be sent.
All sarcasm aside, perhaps those youtube content creators overlooked how useful e-mail is in their haste to adopt social networking platforms.
Re: (Score:2)
Email isn't really a good substitute. What would you prefer, 900 emails all saying the same thing that you have to manually process, or one comment and 899 up votes supporting it? And if you need to reply to that comment, do you want to send 900 email responses or one follow up comment?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
False flags galore (Score:5, Insightful)
What'll happen is people who hate others speaking their minds will infest their comment sections and troll them, leaving inflammatory comments. This'll get them demonetized, which is about the same as being shut down. Appearing on Youtube is a full-time job if you do it right. It's not vapid internet celebrities either, there is some really incisive content by people like Jimmy Dore [youtube.com] that is regularly reported and demonetized by these trolls.
Censorship isn't a school board banning Huckleberry Finn any more. In the corporatist system we have, corporate censorship isn't any different than government censorship. It doesn't make much difference whether the one silencing your dissent is Youtube or Andrew McCabe. The effect is the same.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Bots (Score:3)
Say goodbye to any political discourse that isn't from the establishment. Say goodbye to anything that's not pro-corporate.
Use an alternative video sharing site (Score:3, Interesting)
I duplicate every video I put up on YT on at least one alternative site. So far I have everything up on Bitchute as well. Anyone who doesn't duplicate their content on an alternative video sharing site, is crazy.
How to solve a problem (Score:5, Insightful)
"How to solve an important but complicated problem"
By: YouTube
1. Ignore problem
2. Keep ignoring problem
3. Once people bring light to problem, keep ignoring it
4. If it might lose you ad revenue, announce you're looking into it (but keep ignoring it)
5. If it has caused you to lose ad revenue, PANIC! ANNOUNCE YOU'RE TAKING MAJOR STEPS TO SOLVE IT!
6. Implement the worst possible solution to fixing the problem (Make sure the solution can be easily abused to shutdown small channels!)
7. Wonder why people hate YouTube
9. ???
10. No profit
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Note: Step 8 is missing because YouTube has ignored that problem
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, somehow the idea of making the down-vote and flag actions ACTUALLY DO SOMETHING, it too much of a stretch for YouTube to imagine.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously a well thought out policy (Score:2)
Will they refund advertisers as well? (Score:3)
Why should the content creators be solely responsible for such comments. Isn't Youtube jointly responsible? Will they refund the money charged to their advertisers?
If not, this is only a tactic to maximize their revenue, not for protecting children.
If they can identifty the comments... (Score:5, Insightful)
If they can identify the comments and demonetize or restrict the video, surely they can give creators the option to instead opt for the comments to be deleted or blocked when they are detected. Some way that creators can choose to have the inappropriate comments removed to prevent demonetization.
Money, money, money (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Money, money, money (Score:4, Insightful)
Also lost in this lady's question, but probably very relevant, was Youtube's announcement the other day that they had identified videos that had high pedo interest. One of the top categories *drum roll* Youth gymnastics videos. It is possible that Youtube's actions were an attempt to prevent sickos from looking at her kid!
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly this! I'm more creeped out that she's trying to monetize her 5 year old this way
Are you creeped out that some big corporation will make the ad revenue on her son's gymnastics video (to the extent that she doesn't)?
Did you castigate America's Funniest Home Videos when they'd send somebody $100 for a tape? What's the objective criteria here?
If YT wasn't troll heaven before, it is now (Score:2)
We are the trolls who say "FUCK!". We shall say "FUCK" again to you, if you do not appease us.
And a shrubbery won't do this time!
Blame the victim (Score:2)
So Youtube can detect inappropriate comments obviously, but instead of deleting, hiding the comment or banning the user of the comment the video itself will be banned. Does not make any sense.
Why can't the trolls render themselves invisible? (Score:2)
My solution approach would be to use MEPR (Multidimensional Earned Public Reputation) to help the trolls in rendering themselves invisible, except to each other and to people who actually want to play with the trolls.
Time's up, but I bid you ADSAuPR, atAJG.
Cobra effect (Score:2)
backwards (Score:5, Insightful)
why punish the video, while the commenter is the one who should be blamed.
wouldn't it be easier to set a time limited (or permanent) commect ban on that id?
basically you could build a bot right now that makes sure everything on youtube get demonetized.
What a dick move (Score:3)
YouTube is not a career (Score:2)
Those who are truly entertaining enough to be worth enough subscribers to make money should probably just go into the proper entertainment industry instead, rather than propping their livelihood up on Google. I wouldn't rely on them to provide me with any service that doesn't get whisked away or changed unrecognisably at a moment's notice, so I sure as heck wouldn't rely on them to pay the bills!
Then we can all use some alternative to Youtube and just be happy with the old idea of making videos because you
Inquiring mother, as bad as the pedophiles? (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe don't put your children on YouTube.
Maybe don't try or expect to make money from your child being on YouTube.
Maybe we all know that social media isn't good for kids anyway.
Brilliant! (Score:2)
YouTube hasn't abandoned or even limit censorship in any way.
They have outsourced it.
Now, consider that YouTube will censor your video, by denying you full exposure/rights/permissions, not (ostensibly) for the content, but because of the comments, even (especially) those you have no control over. If someone wants to harm you, they can easily post objectionable comments to your posts, and *poof*, you suffer consequences of their deliberate acts.
The State wins.
Oh, be sure the State is working their evil on th
YouTube? (Score:2)
How convenient. (Score:2)
A tool to stifle comments comments that are contrary to their agenda as well as an excuse to snarf up 100% of the profits for other people's work.
I for one, welcome our corporate overlords... (Score:2)
...because the more massive communications companies behave this way, the more ammunition there is to claim they should be treated as common carriers.
Why not make YouTube 13+ (Score:2)
Hell force YouTube to require a Google account to even get to the page. Those require you to be 13.
Got to anyways to watch videos with the word fuck in them
Sweet! (Score:2)
Youtube as it was won't survive (Score:2)
I think within the least year or two it's become clear that Youtube as it once existed will not be able to survive. This is partially the fault of advertisers and partly the fault of Youtube itself.
I can understand demonetizing blatant racism, or terrorist training videos, etc, but it seems that just using profanity or DISCUSSING bad things (even for the sake of informing viewers) leads to demonetization now.
What made Youtube refreshing to me was that I don't have to put up with bullshit censorship like ma
Comment ranking system (Score:3)
If only there was some way to rank comments, on say a -1 to 5 scale, then people could view comments at the level they're personally comfortable with.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you get a boner watching a video with a child, the problem is not the video but you.
Re: Think of the Children Hysteria (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually, it's "think of the advertisers" (who don't want their products associated with some kind of comments and might stop paying)
Anyone else? They don't care.
Re: (Score:2)
You think YouTube does not put ads on videos that were demonetized? Who do you think you'd hurt that way? Hint: It ain't YouTube.
Re: (Score:2)
The two former are just doing so to get money. There is no altruism there.
Re: (Score:2)
Mostly just emulators.