RIP Youtube

[Hydra009]

Youtube began essentially as the internet version of America's Funniest Home Videos and as a place where people could ramble almost incoherently about nothing to their crappy webcam at 144p and pretend to be famous.

As the times have changed, Youtube has blown up as the internet's favorite place for cellphone-captured footage of a TV playing Family Guy, internet rants overlaid onto Overwatch footage, drama-filled videos, pranks that violate state laws, false flagging campaigns, and the occasional original and entertaining video that you can watch when the channel isn't crippled by a false DMCA or false flag campaign.

Youtube realizes that there's a problem here and has taken steps to put a better foot forward...by shooting itself in the foot.

First up is the community guidelines debacle:



Most of those aren't too bad, but the problem is interpretation.  For example, cursing.  How much is too much?  If a movie review video says that Suicide Squad was fucking terrible, should it be hit with demonetization?  And the last rule especially hurts news or political videos.  Virtually any video they put up is going to fall afoul of that rule.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gbph5or0NuM

Lots of YouTube channels got some of their videos demonetized - which must be awful for people who do youtube for a living - but some managed to successfully challenge it.  And a lot of the big YouTubers have wisely decided to rely on alternate sources of income than youtube adverts - they sell t-shirts, do twitch streams, shill audible trials, etc.  So, there's not much of a body count from this move yet.

That's where YouTube Heroes comes in!  Is there a YouTube personality you despise?  I mean, really, really despise?  Do you want to ruin their livelihood because you dislike something they said?  Boy, do I have the unpaid internship for you!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDpv1Ztq-S4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7rgw0kmmsQ

Angry Joe got a false copywrite claim for that video, btw.  :/

This isn't the end of Youtube, but it is the beginning of the end.  If this Heroes stuff gets off the ground and starts shutting down channels, I guarantee you that a lot of the big names will start jumping ship and YouTube will eventually decline and ultimately be replaced by a more competent competitor.

I know some of you guys make videos on youtube.  What do you think about this?

[TomFoolery]

From what I understand, this only applies to monetized videos, not all videos in general. They're basically saying you can't set yourself up to make money by spewing racist shit or methamphetamine instructional videos. Advertisers like Kleenex and Coca Cola don't like it. Seems fair to me.

It's hardly "censorship."

[Hydra009]

From what I understand, this only applies to monetized videos, not all videos in general. They're basically saying you can't set yourself up to make money by spewing racist shit or methamphetamine instructional videos. Advertisers like Kleenex and Coca Cola don't like it. Seems fair to me.

It's hardly "censorship."

Well, yeah...I can see how some advertisers might not want their ads to appear on certain videos.  Anheuser-Busch might not want their ad to appear on this video, for example.  That's fine.

But the first example of demonetization that I can recall was of demonetization was Philip De Franco talking about a video where a SJW was berating her Lyft driver for the audacity and insensitivity of having a hulu girl on his dashboard.  Clearly, the crime of the century.  Even though the demonetization was triggered by a bot and censorship wasn't exactly the intent as far as I can tell, it certainly has the appearance of censorship, particularly to those most affected by this change.

If you were on youtube and this happened to you immediately after ruffling a certain group's feathers, what would your reaction be?

[TomFoolery]

If you were on youtube and this happened to you immediately after ruffling a certain group's feathers, what would be your reaction would be?

Welcome to the Internet?

YouTube is a private entity. Was the video removed, or were the ads just stripped?

It reminds me a lot of that idiot Duck Dynasty guy who lost his show after saying a bunch of stupid Duck Dynasty shit, and people called that censorship too. No, A&E just decided they didn't want that bigot as a spokesperson, but he was still free to spew his Duck Dynasty bullshit all over America for free.

[drunkenshoe]

Gad to hear this. It's not censorhip at all.

This is going to get wider and certainly will target certain vloggers. Heads up.

There is so many deliberate bullshit and severe dumbing down going on out there, if it wasn't for money a big chunk of it wouldn't exist. They are going to find out the consequences after a certain generation 'learning' from youtube gets in charge.

[Hydra009]

YouTube is a private entity. Was the video removed, or were the ads just stripped?

Ads.  I though that was pretty clear about that.

It reminds me a lot of that idiot Duck Dynasty guy who lost his show after saying a bunch of stupid Duck Dynasty shit, and people called that censorship too. No, A&E just decided they didn't want that bigot as a spokesperson, but he was still free to spew his Duck Dynasty bullshit all over America for free.

Poor comparison.  This is more like a bookstore - a virtually monopolistic chain - deciding to present a friendlier image and suddenly authors report a series of incidents and a bunch of atheist books suspiciously having ordering problems.

It's not exactly censorship (those who call it that are jumping the gun a little bit), but it's a worrying development.  Though of course, the people on the other side of the political isle - people who haven't yet been affected - aren't worried one bit.  And of course, their tune might change if their favorite books are affected.

[TomFoolery]

Ads.  I though that was pretty clear about that.

I know they were. I was just trying to make sure you understood that.

Poor comparison.  This is more like a bookstore - a virtually monopolistic chain - deciding to present a friendlier image and suddenly authors report a series of incidents and a bunch of atheist books suspiciously have ordering problems.

I think it's a pretty good comparison, actually, given the video is still out in the open and still searchable. Your comparison would only work if the video was still technically posted, but virtually impossible to access, impossible to link to, etc. It's still there for the world to see, it's just no longer a money maker by YouTube's rules. There's nothing stopping him from posting it on a private blog and seeking monetization opportunities on his own.   

[Johan]

This isn't the end of Youtube, but it is the beginning of the end. 

OMG!!! The sky is falling!!! The sky is falling!!!

These rules apply only to users who choose to try to monetize their uploads. And, no one is saying they can't post their shit. Only that they MAY not be able to monetize all of it. Meanwhile Youtube is freely able to monetize any and all videos for themselves regardless of what they allow for users. And there is something like an hour or more of new video being uploaded every second. Probably less than 5 minutes of each of those hours will ever end up being monetized into anything resembling measurable income for users. Probably way less than 5 minutes of every hour uploaded. But Youtube can and does monetize every minute of uploaded video for themselves. Yep, sure looks like the beginning of the end to me.

[FaithIsFilth]

From what I understand, this only applies to monetized videos, not all videos in general. They're basically saying you can't set yourself up to make money by spewing racist shit or methamphetamine instructional videos. Advertisers like Kleenex and Coca Cola don't like it. Seems fair to me.

It's hardly "censorship."

It's about a lot more than racism or drug making videos. That's a very poor way of summing this up. "Controversial or sensitive subjects and events, including subjects related to war, political conflicts, natural disasters and tragedies, even if graphic imagery is not shown." This is, in large part, about shutting up alternative and independent media people and giving them less of an incentive to report on things that expose the government's BS. The government is working with Google to shut these people up, both liberal and conservative alt/ independent media people, because they want people going to mainstream media to get their news. It's all about controlling the narrative. When people are going to alt/ independent media, the government is not the one controlling the narrative, and the government doesn't like that.

[Hydra009]

OMG!!! The sky is falling!!! The sky is falling!!!

The title was intentionally hyperbolic.  I'd like to think I presented a more nuanced view than that, though given the take-aways, it's not looking like I wasn't very successful with that.  :/

Sure, the issue could be overblown and certainly some of the reactions I've seen on YouTube have been on the extreme side (though naturally, YouTubers hit with this stuff are going to have a more personal perspective on this).  Imo it's better to be needlessly concerned than to be unconcerned or even supportive of stuff that - while well-intentioned - could easily harm the community.

Just curious, did anyone notice the Youtube Heroes thing?  I can't help but notice that no one has tried to defend that yet.

[Hijiri Byakuren]

I'm not especially concerned about the monetization thing, but "YouTube Heroes" is a disaster waiting to happen. I think Armoured Skeptic's video in the OP covers that bit.


Fair and balanced (like Fox News).

[Johan]

Imo it's better to be needlessly concerned than to be unconcerned or even supportive of stuff that - while well-intentioned - could easily harm the community.

Well if we get to core of it, monetizing videos involves advertising right? I cannot remember a time in my life when advertisers on radio, broadcast television and print media hesitated for even a second to pull their ad dollars the moment the content their ads were supporting ventured into territory they felt was inappropriate for their brand to be associated with. Seems to me, the ONLY thing policy does is put youtube videos on the same sort of playing field that every other form of ad supported media has been on since the invention of ad supported media.

Boo hoo hoo, I can't any advertisers to support my pro-prediphile/pro-hate-speach/pro-sheep-fucking youtube videos. No shit, really? Welcome to real world fuck nut.

[chill98]

Youtube began essentially as the internet version of America's Funniest Home Videos and as a place where people could ramble almost incoherently about nothing to their crappy webcam at 144p and pretend to be famous.

As the times have changed, Youtube has blown up as the internet's favorite place for cellphone-captured footage of a TV playing Family Guy, internet rants overlaid onto Overwatch footage, drama-filled videos, pranks that violate state laws, false flagging campaigns, and the occasional original and entertaining video that you can watch when the channel isn't crippled by a false DMCA or false flag campaign.

Youtube realizes that there's a problem here and has taken steps to put a better foot forward...by shooting itself in the foot.

Most of those aren't too bad, but the problem is interpretation.

That's where YouTube Heroes comes in!  Is there a YouTube personality you despise?  I mean, really, really despise?  Do you want to ruin their livelihood because you dislike something they said?  Boy, do I have the unpaid internship for you!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDpv1Ztq-S4

This isn't the end of Youtube, but it is the beginning of the end.  If this Heroes stuff gets off the ground and starts shutting down channels, I guarantee you that a lot of the big names will start jumping ship and YouTube will eventually decline and ultimately be replaced by a more competent competitor.

The advertisers themselves should be able to not advertise on channels they do not want to be associated with, and that in itself would be enough.  The 'heroes' stuff is different. Your 2nd video hits the problem where it is most relevant.  Heroes does seem to be quite an opportunity for censorship.

[TomFoolery]

It's about a lot more than racism or drug making videos. That's a very poor way of summing this up. "Controversial or sensitive subjects and events, including subjects related to war, political conflicts, natural disasters and tragedies, even if graphic imagery is not shown." This is, in large part, about shutting up alternative and independent media people and giving them less of an incentive to report on things that expose the government's BS. The government is working with Google to shut these people up, both liberal and conservative alt/ independent media people, because they want people going to mainstream media to get their news. It's all about controlling the narrative. When people are going to alt/ independent media, the government is not the one controlling the narrative, and the government doesn't like that.

Yeah, the thing is, this isn't the North Korean Internet we're talking about. This is just about people's ability to make money off of videos on YouTube. It's not controlling any narrative, it's just controlling people's ability to profit from it.

Alternative media is great, but it has its drawbacks. As a former journalist, I can tell you that the pressure to keep up with the 24 hour news cycle and competition by "citizen journalists" with cellphone cameras drove a lot of good, balanced, fair, decent journalists and news organizations into bankruptcy, and no there's no such thing as fact checking anymore. Journalism used to be a wonderfully self-policed institution where you couldn't just publish whatever the fuck you wanted and mumble "sorry" later with zero repercussions if your story turned out to be bullshit. Reputation used to be everything, but not so much anymore. So thank you for that, alternative media.

[Baruch]

Not just the Internet ... political reporting got bastardized back in the 80s when they changed the broadcast rules to let conservative talk radio/tv hosts run rampant as narrative jockeys (but not shilling for any particular candidate, shilling for ideology).  The difference between reporting and editorial and between journalism and advertising has been destroyed for some time now.