YouTube's being stupid again.

[CastletonSnob]

Another year, another stupid policy change from YouTube.

Recently, YouTube put in a new policy that will demonetize videos that have swear words in the first 8 seconds.

YouTube has a new monetization policy regarding profanity. Creators are unhappy with the rollout. - Tubefilter

A change to YouTube's monetization policy has drawn complaints from its community. As creators deal with a fresh wave of yellow dollar signs, the platform

www.tubefilter.com

YouTube is so lucky it doesn't have any real competition, or nobody would use it.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

"Again"? Insinuating that there has been a span of time where YouTube hasn't been stupid?

 

[Dalisclock]

"Again"? Insinuating that there has been a span of time where YouTube hasn't been stupid?

That's exactly what I thought when I saw the title.

You can't start being stupid if you never stopped.

 

[Gordon_4]

"Again"? Insinuating that there has been a span of time where YouTube hasn't been stupid?

Only on days not ending in ‘Y’

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Only on days not ending in ‘Y’

Samedi?

 

[Gordon_4]

Samedi?

Got me again, you magnificent bastard.

 

[BrawlMan]

​

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Got me again, you magnificent bastard.

I do feel a bit dirty having to resort to French.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Only on days not ending in ‘Y’

Also Octember πth.

 

[gorfias]

"Again"? Insinuating that there has been a span of time where YouTube hasn't been stupid?

One used to be able to just post anything that wasn't illegal there. It, and the Internet, was the wild west. Anyone could develop a following. Work hard and you saw your subscriber numbers go up. Then 2016 happened and $$#$# got real. Shadow banning. Being demoted in searches. Users getting fed corporate videos rather than independent media they might actually want to see. Demonetization, outright banning and deplatforming. This on a platform that is supposed to be a public forum with SS230 protection.

Since 2016, Youtube has been stupid in a very different way.

I don't know the numbers but I hope these alt sites? I hope they are eating into youtube's money.

Free speech can be very aggravating and outrageous even. I still go to youtube primarily for things that aren't very controversial. You can view all sorts of things about tech, gaming and other entertainments. But for news analysis and political opinion? I do go to alternate sites. As a Jew, it really hurts seeing all the hate out there on these alt sites. But I mute them and get points of view I don't find on talking head channels.

 

[Gordon_4]

One used to be able to just post anything that wasn't illegal there.

one of YouTube's problem is they're now big enough that they qualify as a broadcaster, and what's legal to broadcast in one country is not legal in another. So they're now stuck trying to balance a bazillion probable legal issues.

 

[gorfias]

one of YouTube's problem is they're now big enough that they qualify as a broadcaster, and what's legal to broadcast in one country is not legal in another. So they're now stuck trying to balance a bazillion probable legal issues.

Food to think upon, thanks. IE, There are nations were it is illegal for women to dance publicly. What is Youtube's responsibilities in such a case? While they may be incorporated in the USA, US corporations are held internationally responsible for certain (not enough) things. Once an international entity, should they lose SS230 protections? These protections were, I'm informed in this forum (one learns things here!) started due to matters such as letters to the editor being published in big papers like The New York Times and the times cannot function if they are held to the standards of a publisher with regards to these letter. The NYT is read internationally.

 

[BrawlMan]

​

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Hot take time: The advertising revenue model cannot work for YouTube, or any form of media delivery service that involves independently-produced content.

Advertisers love TV because it's generally safe; broadcast TV in any but the most basic, local form is the domain of corporations, where any idea must run a gauntlet of executives and advisory boards and focus groups until all the potentially disagreeable rough edges have been worn off. (Sometimes this fails, but that's more the exception than the rule.) But when you start giving audience access to Alex Q. Everybody, you run the risk that Alex is going to go off their meds and start screaming at the camera about how a particular ethnic group are agents of the Devil. That makes advertisers nervous, because they want no kind of notion going around that "Brand X supports genocide".

So either we put up with ever-increasing restrictions on monetization, or we switch to a fee-based service where we pay directly for content.

 

[BrawlMan]

Hot take time: The advertising revenue model cannot work for YouTube, or any form of media delivery service that involves independently-produced content.

Advertisers love TV because it's generally safe; broadcast TV in any but the most basic, local form is the domain of corporations, where any idea must run a gauntlet of executives and advisory boards and focus groups until all the potentially disagreeable rough edges have been worn off. (Sometimes this fails, but that's more the exception than the rule.) But when you start giving audience access to Alex Q. Everybody, you run the risk that Alex is going to go off their meds and start screaming at the camera about how a particular ethnic group are agents of the Devil. That makes advertisers nervous, because they want no kind of notion going around that "Brand X supports genocide".

So either we put up with ever-increasing restrictions on monetization, or we switch to a fee-based service where we pay directly for content.

I remember back in 2012 how most small and medium YTbers (mainly on the video game and movie side) weren't satisfied with the then new policies at the time, and threatened a mass exodus to Dailymotion. All of them were talking shit, and not a single one moved their channel or platform. After that huge performance, nearly everyone would go on like they never said anything, "was just joking", or put a "I never said/promised that. I said it might be a possibility". The idiots in charge ain't the only problem with YT. A lot of these user can't commit for shit.

 

[CastletonSnob]

I remember back in 2012 how most small and medium YTbers (mainly on the video game and movie side) weren't satisfied with the then new policies at the time, and threatened a mass exodus to Dailymotion. All of them were talking shit, and not a single one moved their channel or platform. After that huge performance, nearly everyone would go on like they never said anything, "was just joking", or put a "I never said/promised that. I said it might be a possibility". The idiots in charge ain't the only problem with YT. A lot of these user can't commit for shit.

I'm old enough to remember the big fuss about SOPA.

(I actually had to look it up, because I couldn't remember the exact name of the bill, but I remember all of the videos about it).

 

[BrawlMan]

I'm old enough to remember the big fuss about SOPA.

(I actually had to look it up, because I couldn't remember the exact name of the bill, but I remember all of the videos about it).

SOPA & PIPA. One of the few awesome moments of everyone on the internet banning together to stop them. I'm glad we all did, but one of the sad truths was that a good amount of video game companies were on board with using it. Nintendo being one of them as well. Most companies decided to stop only after realizing how much marketing they get from let's players and reactors.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

Hot take time: The advertising revenue model cannot work for YouTube, or any form of media delivery service that involves independently-produced content.

Advertisers love TV because it's generally safe; broadcast TV in any but the most basic, local form is the domain of corporations, where any idea must run a gauntlet of executives and advisory boards and focus groups until all the potentially disagreeable rough edges have been worn off. (Sometimes this fails, but that's more the exception than the rule.) But when you start giving audience access to Alex Q. Everybody, you run the risk that Alex is going to go off their meds and start screaming at the camera about how a particular ethnic group are agents of the Devil. That makes advertisers nervous, because they want no kind of notion going around that "Brand X supports genocide".

So either we put up with ever-increasing restrictions on monetization, or we switch to a fee-based service where we pay directly for content.

Which then leads to no one looking to small channels because they don't want to risk money on something with unverified quality which then leads to losing everything but big brands.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Which then leads to no one looking to small channels because they don't want to risk money on something with unverified quality which then leads to losing everything but big brands.

Boom! The Internet becomes TV 2.0. Nice and safe and family-friendly and utterly creatively moribund.

 

[BrawlMan]

The Beevs - Demonetized

Welcome to Beavertown, also known as The Beevs. Sets in a couple of months into the future, The Beevs is the last remaining bastion of hipsters, geeks, and freaks. In this webcomic, we follow Tay, Gabby, and friends on their crazy lives in this weird-ass town.

m.webtoons.com