Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Youtube Social Networks

YouTube Unveils a Stricter Harassment Policy (cnn.com) 152

Posted by msmash from the tussle-continues dept.
After months of promising to reexamine how it handles harassment on its platform, YouTube has unveiled an update to its policy. From a report: On Wednesday, the Google-owned video platform said it would take a "stronger stance" against threats and personal attacks, among other changes intended to address the safety of its community. YouTube said it would now prohibit "veiled" or "implied" threats, not just explicit ones. This new policy includes content that simulates violence against a person or language indicating physical violence could occur. YouTube also said it will no longer permit "maliciously" insulting someone based on characteristics like race, gender expression or sexual orientation, whether it's a private individual, YouTube personality or public figure. The policy applies to content, as well as comments. The move comes six months after YouTube faced one of its most high-profile controversies over harassment in recent memory.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

YouTube Unveils a Stricter Harassment Policy More

YouTube Unveils a Stricter Harassment Policy

Comments Filter:

  • Welcome to nanny-tube (Score:3, Interesting)

    by monkeyFuzz ( 3398671 ) on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @02:39PM (#59508972)
    I'm so happy we have only safe sanitized content to consume without fear of anyone hurting my feelings, triggering anxiety, and affecting my self esteem.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Chromal ( 56550 )
      Yeah, it's like we as a society have decided that psychological predators and molesters have no place in our civilization. Amen! May they get the mental wellness care they so clearly need as the wrongful outlets for their disorderly hatreds close the doors and withdraw the welcome mats. Let them be shunned into submission.

      • "we as a society"
         
        LOL.

        • Stawp it. Your disrupting my corporate sanitized society! That's hatespeech.

          I can't handle it. Stawp it. I'm telling on you! You should be banned cuz you're not corporate friendly. Your message is not approved for my society!

          • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

            by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

            How about you stop demanding a free soapbox from everyone you meet? YouTube is a private business and entitled to make money, and if that means banning content that loses them money that's their right.

            If you want to argue for full state ownership of YouTube or for destroying their business by forcing them to host all content then just say so. Be honest about what you are demanding here.

      • Right! Far be it in my personal capacity as an individual to choose to ignore or respond to content that bothers me effectively. I need nanny-tube and other big brothers and sisters to do that for me so I don't have to traumatized by the internet which I'm powerless to turn off, or regulate the use of, to suit my temperament.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Chromal ( 56550 )
          How about your personal capacity to respect others even if they are different? How about your personal capacity to live and let live, to think twice and speak once, to live life with love? We're all in it together, it takes a village, etc. If your temperament is such that you can't be active online without wrongfully disparaging others, then maybe you need some personal capacity to pull the plug and stay offline and give others the space to live as if they aren't being stalked by a cult of hate.

          • "How about your personal capacity to live and let live, to think twice and speak once, to live life with love? We're all in it together, it takes a village, etc"
             
            Maybe some people don't believe in that drivel. The idea of "live and let live" for example is idiotic. If you are doing something wrong, I don't want you to "live".

          • I feel triggered by your wrongful disparagement of me. I feel you have hatefully characterized my online activity as vitriolic without a shred of evidence. I feel oppressed and stereotyped by you and am in need of a safe space to live where I'm not being stalked by this cult of hate against me. A place where my voice can be heard. Where are the moderators on /. to protect me?

      • Re:Welcome to nanny-tube (Score:4, Insightful)

        by lgw ( 121541 ) on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @02:53PM (#59509052) Journal

        Free speech includes hurtful speech, therefore it has no place in our civilization. Amen!

        Somewhere there's a totalitarian dictator wannabe looking for a useful idiot. You two should get a room.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by BlueStrat ( 756137 )

        Yeah, it's like we as a society have decided that psychological predators and molesters have no place in our civilization. Amen! May they get the mental wellness care they so clearly need as the wrongful outlets for their disorderly hatreds close the doors and withdraw the welcome mats. Let them be shunned into submission.

        Isn't one highly-censored & controlled Chinese internet and social credit system in the world enough?

        Strat

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Dunbal ( 464142 ) *
        Unanimously? This very discussion contradicts what you're saying. We as a society present a spectrum of views on this subject, just like everything else. Of course you can choose not to see it, but that doesn't mean it's not there.

  • They better not do anything to my account if they know what is good for them!

  • 'bout time (Score:3)

    by Atrox Canis ( 1266568 ) on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @02:46PM (#59509010)

    I was getting tired of ignoring comments that might have offended my delicate sensibilities. This is a good thing for everyone /s

  • Youtube going further downhill (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MBGMorden ( 803437 ) on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @02:46PM (#59509016)

    Youtube was originally great specifically because it was an outlet for opinions, views, and comments that weren't "safe" enough for mainstream media. As they've become more and more entrenched in ad money it's been further and further restricted into basically just being the same thing that they were originally the alternative to.

    The people now will have to go out and find yet another outlet to communicate all the ideas that the powers that be have concluded are "inappropriate".

    • The people now will have to go out and find yet another outlet to communicate all the ideas that the powers that be have concluded are "inappropriate".

      How about they learn to express themselves without trying to intimidate others out of sharing their opinions?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Dunbal ( 464142 ) *
        Shutting them up and banning them doesn't make them learn anything.

        • Shutting them up and banning them doesn't make them learn anything.

          Nor does letting them shit all over the comments sections. If someone tells them off they just call them a cuck or whatever and move on to the next video to shit all over that one, too.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Can you give an example of an opinion you can't give without violating these rules?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by DogDude ( 805747 )
      The people now will have to go out and find yet another outlet to communicate all the ideas that the powers that be have concluded are "inappropriate".

      I think that's great. I'm much more comfortable spending my advertising budget on Youtube, now. I don't advertise with companies that are platforms for assholes.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Dunbal ( 464142 ) *
        But the amount of people who view your ads is shrinking daily. The market you are going for includes assholes.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Dunbal ( 464142 ) *
      This is how the internet works. It has long been said that the internet interprets censorship as damage to the network and routes around it. There are other sites than Youtube and as Youtube censors itself to oblivion, sites like Bitchute etc will gain followers and revenue which they will be able to use to update their service. Sure, it will take a while before grandma catches on, but she'll get there. The wheel is always turning.
    • Is that what YouTube was? Who goes to YouTube for opinions? I suspect most people are there for cat videos and female game reviewers showing off their tiddies. Anyone has any idea what percentage of YouTube videos (either by number or number of views) this actually impacts?

  • (unless they pay to be hosted)

  • Bias (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Iamthecheese ( 1264298 ) on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @02:48PM (#59509026)
    I have absolutely no doubt that a hateful rant against white people will be treated exactly the same as a hateful rant against black people. The reviewers will exhibit no bias at all. Calling for the death of all men or one man will be treated the same as a call for the death of all women or one woman. After all Youtube has such a long history of unbiased moderation.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by DogDude ( 805747 )
      Since you don't like Youtube's bias, you might want to spend your advertising dollars elsewhere.

      • YouTube has a de-facto monopoly, don't delude yourself there.

        That is why they can act like that in the first place.

        Otherwise everyone would to that magical other place where you can talk like a human being and are expected to handle being talked to like a sane person.

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by DogDude ( 805747 )
          No, I don't think that's true. I can advertise directly with Facebook, Google, or Disney right now. Those are all very big networks. There are tons of smaller ones we can use, too (Bing, etc.). Youtube isn't the only ad platform. Youtube/Google might be the biggest, but they certainly have a monopoly on it.

  • We run a nice establishment here! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by shanen ( 462549 ) on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @02:49PM (#59509034) Homepage Journal

    Really? They want to elevate the atmosphere of YouTube? ROFLMAO is the only thing to say.

    The root of the problem is that YouTube is a criminal enterprise. So many citations that I can't pick one, but I think the most recent I encountered may have been in Think Fast & Break Things . Taplin came back to YouTube's abuse of copyright a number of times, especially for music. YouTube and the EVIL google are loving that safe harbor clause of the broken copyright system.

    Can't recall if he addressed the obvious solution, but I'll repeat it: Popular content needs to be whitelisted. If YouTube actually wanted to stop the piracy and abuse of copyright, then they would stop feeding the pirates. The copyright-abusing searches are obvious precisely because the targets are famous. If your search is for famous content, then you are going to use the famous name, and that search should only return the authorized links approved by the owner of the copyright. (Separate sadness that the owner of the copyright is so rarely the creator these days. And yes, there are fair use exceptions, but they need to be whitelisted, too.)

    Of course YouTube will never do anything along such lines. It would reduce the traffic, and the entire fake value of YouTube is based on the volume of the traffic. That actually includes the quantity of comments, too, no matter how much they stink. Quantity uber alles.

    Oh yeah. About deodorizing the YouTube comments. Cesspool. 'Nuff said.

    P.S. Deep thought of the weird day. We don't need any new content. If you were born yesterday you could spend the rest of your life consuming the content that already exists. We could benefit from better content, but we sure don't need no more.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Chromal ( 56550 )
      Civil law != Criminal law. Infringement != Theft. Piracy requires a wrongful sale to be piracy. Publication == promotion. Culture cannot be owned, it falls to the public domain (even if corrupt legislatures can be convinced otherwise by corporations and oligarchs to issue illegitimate copywrite guidance).
    • What a horrifying feel thought. Sure there’s a lot of content that’s crap at best, but you’ve doomed humanity to the best it’s managed so far. Imagine if in 1960 someone decided we’d created enough music and no more need be produced.

      A poignant post, but why’d you have to end it with a death sentence for humanity. Why even bother trying to save the planet let alone getting out of bed when there’s nothing new beneath the sun and never will be.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by shanen ( 462549 )

        I'm not advocating for the horror scenario. I'm apparently using a different sense of "need" than you are thinking about.

        I wonder if it would help to put it in more scientific terms? Some people think that the time of Thomas Jefferson was the last period when a single human being could learn all of the important science. In the case of math, I just read a lamentation from a serious mathematician than we are far beyond the point where any mathematician can learn all of what's going on. The same thing applies

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Uh, YouTube is regularly accused of overzealous copyright enforcement.

  • Ah, so THEY'LL get to decide? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by argStyopa ( 232550 ) on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @02:53PM (#59509048) Journal

    Basically, they've been trying to formulate a policy that would support their idea of demonetizing and demonizing anyone they don't politically agree with, without somehow coming off as well-intentioned fascists.

    Well, well-intentioned totalitarianism is still despotism, isn't it? I'm sure all who agree with them will FLOCK to their banner and cheer that now YouTube is a delightful "safe space" where they are all freely allowed to agree with each other vehemently.

    Of course if you DON'T happen to agree with some of their credo:
    - that Trump is the worst human ever, if he's even human
    - that global warming is the worst thing ever
    - that cops suck and are more or less only the jackbooted enforcers for the patriarchy
    - that America sucks, always has
    - etc ....I guess you can just fuck off?

    "The policy applies to content, as well as comments."
    Will it also apply to the people that respond if I, say, put up a video about how global warming is bullshit? Will they also prevent people being mean to me there?

    • Re:Ah, so THEY'LL get to decide? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by drinkypoo ( 153816 ) <drink@hyperlogos.org> on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @03:19PM (#59509206) Homepage Journal

      Will it also apply to the people that respond if I, say, put up a video about how global warming is bullshit? Will they also prevent people being mean to me there?

      This isn't about "being mean". People will still be free to tell you that you're an idiot when you say stupid shit. They won't be free to threaten you, or make racist insults, or attack your sexuality or identity.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      The problem with this conspiracy theory is that it's easy disproven by simply looking at YouTube. For example, many progressive and left leaning channels are demonetized as well. Some More News, Three Arrows, Contrapoints, Philosophy Tube, The Young Turks, the list goes on.

      You can also find many far right channels which are not demonetized. Some Prager U (fake university run by billionaires) videos are monetized, for example. People like Carl Benjamin, aka Sargon, are monetized.

      Conspiracy theories work best

  • I'm offended (Score:3)

    by nwaack ( 3482871 ) on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @02:53PM (#59509050)
    And the perpetually offended win again. Grow a spine, people.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by geek ( 5680 )

      That would require a level of introspection and self awareness these people are incapable of.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Chromal ( 56550 )
        Maybe they're too busy licking their wrongfully-inflicted wounds from insensitive clods with dicks so long they need their own civil aviation lighting.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Dunbal ( 464142 ) *
      Nah they will build a censorship wall around themselves and stay safe in their own little Youtube world. In the meantime the rest of us will have moved on to other sites where we can carry on normal conversations. It's actually an ideal solution.

      • Nah they will build a censorship wall around themselves and stay safe in their own little Youtube world. In the meantime the rest of us will have moved on to other sites where we can carry on normal conversations.

        From TFA: YouTube also said it will no longer permit "maliciously" insulting someone based on characteristics like race, gender expression or sexual orientation, whether it's a private individual, YouTube personality or public figure.

        If your normal conversations involve barking racial, homophobic a

  • Calm down everyone (Score:5, Insightful)

    by K. S. Van Horn ( 1355653 ) on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @02:53PM (#59509054) Homepage

    There's nothing to worry about. They're not going to take away your right to insult, demonize, and harrass someone for being white or male. That will always be an exception to whatever rules they put in place.

  • new policy? (Score:3)

    by Hentai007 ( 188457 ) on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @03:05PM (#59509122)

    "YouTube said it would now prohibit "veiled" or "implied" threats" ... "content that simulates violence against a person or language indicating physical violence could occur. YouTube also said it will no longer permit "maliciously" insulting someone based on characteristics like race, gender expression or sexual orientation, whether it's a private individual, YouTube personality or public figure. "

    So they are getting rid of the comment section then?

  • Define "malicious" (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @03:08PM (#59509144)

    YouTube also said it will no longer permit "maliciously" insulting someone

    Soo...
    "TRUMP is a hateful racist who needs to die" - well that's not malicious, they're just making a political statement
    "Elizabeth Warren lied and said she was an indian to get benefits" - Well that's a racist attack on indians and women and needs to be stricken.

    Do we recall that no less than 10 years ago the Cartoon Network BANNED Speedy Gonzales because he was a racist stereotype? The same Speedy Gonazles that continues to proudly air on Mexican airwaves?

  • I'm all for a civil discourse but NOT at the expense of freedom of expression / opinion where censorship is some half-assed "solution."

    This can and WILL be used to shut down conversations because somebody is butt hurt and offended over another person's opinion. From what I hear FecesBook is already banning people when they simply state history about the Nazis!?

    Since this applies not only to comments but content as well what does this mean for jokes about other people? Are they censored now?

    This is an extre

    • >

      When did America turn into a bunch of wussies when you are no longer allowed to express your opinion on something, regardless of how unpopular it may be?

      Right about 2008 by my reckoning.

      • When did America turn into a bunch of wussies when you are no longer allowed to express your opinion on something, regardless of how unpopular it may be?/

        Right about 2008 by my reckoning.

        That's when it reached critical mass.

        The seeds were planted in colleges back in the 30's, 40's, 50's and especially 60's and 70's.

        This cancer, this mollycoddling has to be purged from our society.

  • Youtube alternatives? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Harvey Manfrenjenson ( 1610637 ) on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @04:40PM (#59509682)

    I'm going to bypass the free-speech debate here, and just start my own Ask Slashdot:

    What are the best alternatives to Youtube, and why do you like them?

    Possible factors to consider include: better handling of controversial speech (for various values of "better"); better handling of DMCA complaints; better monetization options for small producers; better content for audiences.

  • Fuckin iSnowflake generation! (Score:3)

    by BAReFO0t ( 6240524 ) on Wednesday December 11, 2019 @05:17PM (#59509840)

    You know what happens, when somebod does those things to me?

    NOTHING!

    Why would it? It is some meanigless moron yelling. ... Then what?

    How are these people even going through daily life? Will we soon see them rolling around in Dalek safe space suits, exterminating everyone who might suggest they are not perfect snowflakes?

    They need a mental hospital! For anxiety distorder and a debilitating lack of self-confidence!
    I'm serious. This is a health crisis, it's just that nobody sees it as one.

Slashdot Top Deals

"An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup." - H.L. Mencken

Close