Slashdot Mirror
YouTube Clarifies 'Hate Speech' Definition and Which Videos Won't Be Monetized (arstechnica.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: In a blog post, YouTube outlined more specific definitions of hate speech and what kinds of incendiary content wouldn't be eligible for monetization. Three categories are classified as hate speech, with the broadest one being "hateful content." YouTube is defining this as anything that "promotes discrimination or disparages or humiliates an individual or group of people on the basis of the individual's or group's race, ethnicity, or ethnic origin, nationality, religion, disability, age, veteran status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or other characteristic associated with systematic discrimination or marginalization." The second category is "inappropriate use of family entertainment characters," which means content showing kid-friendly characters in "violent, sexual, vile, or otherwise inappropriate behavior," no matter if the content is satirical or a parody. The final category is somewhat broad: "incendiary and demeaning content" means that anything "gratuitously" demeaning or shameful toward an individual or group is prohibited. The updated guidelines are a response to creators asking YouTube to clarify what will and will not be deemed advertiser-friendly. YouTube acknowledges that its systems still aren't perfect, but it says it's doing its best to inform creators while maintaining support for advertisers. YouTube also launched a new course in its Creator Academy that creators can take to learn more about how to make "content appealing for a broad range of advertisers."
Sounds like YouTube is doubling down on letting the folks in charge of "report abuse" triage bring their biases when choosing which videos make money and which ones don't. Hopefully Vimeo is taking notes...
anything that "promotes discrimination or disparages or humiliates an individual or group of people on the basis of the individual's or group's race
How many far-left videos are there I wonder that whine about oppression from the evil white male, or just from white people in general?
Well now, all of them are subject to complaint under these rules... conservatives are going to have a field day bringing down videos.
After all, one of the worst things you can do an opponent is make them live by the rules they made...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Unlike ethnicity, disability, or age, religion is something the individual chose him/herself, and should be completely open to ridicule and mocking. It's an ideology, there is nothing sacred about it.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
This isn't really a conservative/liberal issue.
This is an authoritarian/libertarian issue.
This is how you suppress speaking truth to power. If it doesn't offend someone. Its probably some drivel that isn't worth saying.
Which is what YouTube wants. Less provocative news and social critique, more ad friendly cat videos.
If the rules were applied evenly, this would block out entire segments of the media like news, music and comedy.
Say whatever you want, just don't expect Google to help you make a living saying it.
Unless of course TFA says more than TFS.
No, this is how a private corporation chooses to do business.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Thus their attempts to suppress concepts and ideas that they disagree with is an act of censorship, tyranny and oppression.
They aren't censoring or suppressing anything. You can still put publish whatever. For free! To the whole world! They just won't attach ads to your speech if it's offensive to advertisers.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.