Slashdot Mirror
YouTube Says It Will Crack Down On Bizarre Videos Targeting Children (theverge.com)
"Earlier this week, a report in The New York Times and a blog post on Medium drew a lot of attention to a world of strange and sometimes disturbing YouTube videos aimed at young children," reports The Verge. "The genre [...] makes use of popular characters from family-friendly entertainment, but it's often created with little care, and can quickly stray from innocent themes to scenes of violence or sexuality." YouTube is cracking down and will now age restrict videos that violate its policy. From the report: The first line of defense for YouTube Kids are algorithmic filters. After that, there is a team of humans that review videos which have been flagged. If a video with recognizable children's characters gets flagged in YouTube's main app, which is much larger than the Kids app, it will be sent to the policy review team. YouTube says it has thousands of people working around the clock in different time zones to review flagged content. If the review finds the video is in violation of the new policy, it will be age restricted, automatically blocking it from traveling to the Kids app. YouTube says it typically takes at least a few days for content to make its way from YouTube proper to YouTube Kids, and the hope is that within that window, users will flag anything potentially disturbing to children. YouTube also has a team of volunteer moderators, which it calls Contributors, looking for inappropriate content. YouTube says it will start training its review team on the new policy and it should be live within a few weeks. Along with filtering content out of the Kids app, the new policy will also tweak who can see these videos on YouTube's main service. Flagged content will be age restricted, and users won't be able to see those videos if they're not logged in on accounts registered to users 18 years or older. All age-gated content is also automatically exempt from advertising. That means this new policy could put a squeeze on the booming business of crafting strange kid's content.
As long as they don't censor "legitimate satire". Sure, keep the poor kids safe from ponies sliding into boxes of nails, but don't unjustly remove Charlie the Unicorn, or anything from Robot Chicken.
So Trump's boy-scout speech is a goner.
Table-ized A.I.
I hope they keep this one up
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Here we have an entire system of brainwashing targeted at children by their parents.
Sure, the Democrats that keep getting rounded up and hauled away could use some company. No wonder they keep trying to give felons the vote; they're running unopposed in the slammer.
The problem I have with this approach is that it still relies on a human viewing the video, flagging it (instead of just clicking away quickly), content moderators intervening, etc. During that time, however, more kids could be exposed to these types of videos.
Instead, for Youtube Kids, it would be better for parents and kids to have a videos go through a proactive approval process before they are shown. Google obviously doesn't want this: They want magic algorithms to avoid having human review every video for scalability and monetary reason. But I think this process is flawed for Youtube Kids (I'm not as concerned about Youtube proper). Google makes money from these videos, but they want essentially zero responsibility for the content.
Note that there is still room for parody and disturbing videos involving kids characters. I'm fine with that. What these articles are referring to, however, are video creators intentionally gaming the system to get their videos past the Youtube Kids filters in order to get views.
Google needs to step up and be proactive if they want Youtube Kids to actually be reliable instead of a wild west shitshow of scary content.
From Russia with love
Roy Moore molested a child and you're playing "whaddabout"?
It was a kid that he met at the courthouse when her mom was in court at a custody hearing. Guy's a fucking predator and should be on a sex-offender registry.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I know, right ? They even elected their own version of Harvey Weinstein as president. Go figure.
As you mentioned, proactive costs money, which has to come from somewhere. If you were in charge of YouTube Kids, would you fund proactive review by requiring a valid YouTube Red subscription in order to access the app?
Of course not to get too carried away but kids will make use of the media they are exposed to, to rudely edit for shits and giggles. So kids targeting kids or adults targeting kids and of course the worst of them psychologist working at advertising agencies, manipulating children to steal their pocket money, using peer pressure attacks and devaluing their existence so they need to buy their way out of depression a fabrication created by adults targeting children for profit.
No matter how bad some of their content, the targeted at a minor ad that google serves before hand still likely worse and more psychologically damaging. Want safety have a children's only internet fully supervised by adults and no un approved ads. Instead, some bullshit waffle about how they need to political censor the entire internet and only allow pro US corporate propaganda.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Obama killed countless children and you're playing "whaddabout"?
Does this mean I will finally have a way to block my children from spending their time following Team 10, Jake Paul, and other related garbage?
For a while I put in a host entry on their computer to redirect www.youtube.com to 127.0.0.1, but that is a pretty big hammer. They do have legitimate things they watch on Youtube, like tutorials on MIT Scratch and Blender. But this recent craze with you youtubers making crazy amounts of money and influencing kids in negative ways...wish there was a way to block that kind of garbage.
This has been happening for a long time, there have been several campaigns to report these videos across multiple websites. They never get removed, and the further into the playlists you get the more disturbing and sexual content you find, including people hitting on the kids in the comments, asking for their email, some of them even trade cp in the comments.
And fuck all is ever done. Why should I believe them now?
It's the Bradbury brothers and that one creepy foreign guy. They make almost 100% of creepy content targeted at kids.
Rabbi, why are your panties in twist about an thin-reed 30 year old allegation of pederasty, but not over Democrat Senator Bob Menendez took trips to the Dominican Republic for decades to ball child sex slaves? Keep projecting pedoratz.
He's making a direct comparison to the numerous SJWs who previously went around calling dissenters violent rapists and pedophiles who have themselves been convicted of rape, pedophilia, child porn, sexual harassment and gun running.
Scum is scum, no matter where is comes from. It's just that the SJW crew has a lot more scum in it.
Age 14 is not prepubescent. Not all pedophiles are child molesters and not all child molesters are pedophiles.
what the hell is
" the booming business of crafting strange kid's content. "
No more vintage Sesame Street?
They don't need to 'proactively vet every video', they only need to actively vet every ACCOUNT used to upload the videos, once there is enough to judge the channel it can be flagged as suitable for toddlers. If viewers then flag enough videos as problematic, they can change that status on the account as a whole.
These videos are more than odd. They're designed to generate violent toddlers. The avatars are clearly human, even if in colorful garb, the weapons are realistic. There is no clear separator between reality and fiction there for children to build that barrier in their heads. Which seems to be the point.
So my is severely autistic and loves you tube. There are videos he finds related to elmo or what have you that start innocent and devolve into epilepsy inducing random loud music, screaming, and what not.
I will delete them from history but they get recommended again.
Can I just flag a video as 'Never show me this again', would that be so hard?
Oh shut up with that sjw crap. Mix and match whatever you want they are still disgusting people and will never elicit sympathy aside from weirdos like you
paw patrol babies pretend to commit suicide https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I saw this one a few days ago, it was the comments that caught me and I'm sure had a lot to do with this crack down.
That's bullshit. You obviously have never been a parent.
Yes, parents shouldn't let kids live on a tablet all day long...sometimes you just want them to be entertained for a few minutes so you can focus on what you are doing (in my case, my autistic daughter is given a tablet, so I can get some shit done like cooking dinner or doing a bit of woodworking to make some money). It takes no time at all to stumble on this crap. I don't really like her seeing videos where her favorite characters are having their heads ripped off and their bodies lying in a pool of blood (yes, that happened). In Youtube Kids, there doesn't seem to be an easy way to block videos or channels. I would completely block all that content if I could.
And before you say I'm a bad parent...you don't know my life and my problems. Sick of SWJ neckbeards telling me what they think parenting should be without ever even babysitting before.
This shit where people make videos trying to teach young kids who can barely write a sentence to be "non-binary" and "queer" needs to go. It's grossly inappropriate for ALL kids and it's loaded with misinformation and social justice agenda bullshit. Pop n' Olly need to die off as well; they are not only shitty people but they're super DMCA abusers and cyber-bullies when any criticism is leveled against their "show" (see what they did to a YouTuber called "irate bear.")
If you're making a video trying to teach five-year-olds about alternative adult sexual life choices, you are the cancer that is killing the world.
Defensive much?
It's actually not bullshit. YouTube kids is shit precisely because there are no ratings or parental controls. This is why I DO NOT ALLOW my children to use it. Solution simple. Have them watch something safe like PBS kids (free) or Netflix or something else that allows you to make sure your kids aren't watching disgusting content. In my house, my tablets won't even open apps that connect to the internet except for the ones that I've approved without putting in my master password. If my kids want to watch dumb unrated shit on YouTube then you can bet your ass I'm not going to let them explore it themselves. You openly admit that your child is incapable of avoiding this garbage and then hand her the device that seals her doom. That's just plain stupid.
Title says it all.
Of course it's easier to let the kid sit alone with a tablet, and doing so once in a while is not a problem. With an autistic child, doing so most of the time may not be a problem either (I'm not sure even a doctor would know for sure what is best).
But that doesn't mean you need to allow them access to Youtube. You can set up a tablet such that the kid can only run the apps YOU installled, and as long as that doesn't include the youtube app (or a browser), they can't watch this crap. Instead, you download the videos you want to allow your kid to watch, and use a local video player.
The great thing about kids (in this case) is that they love watching the same video again and again until they can repeat every f**king line. Really annoying if you are in the same room as them, but it does mean that you only need to download maybe ten videos.
Story time.
Arguing semantics about a scumbag child predator? Maybe the feds should take a look at your hard drive and search history.
If you don't want ads on your videos, what prevents someone from just marking the video as 18+?
"Forget the engineers." -Carly Fiorina, briber of MIT Technology Review.
Then it is absolutely trivial to solve. Simply wait two months before paying a dime, put it in your EULA that you don't see a cent if your video is "bizarre" (and I mean not a cent AT ALL, not "from whenever we notice") and you'll see these videos vanish pretty fucking quickly.
If it's not the video itself that's the goal for these people, like with the terrorists who don't give a fuck whether they make ad revenue with their message from imaginary friends that want you dead, but if they game the system for money, all you have to do is deny them the money and their incentive to make those videos ceases immediately.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... Because that is probably one of the worst videos I have seen targeting kids.
100% with you on this. Not only that, but hovering over your children filtering every experience they have is bad for them too. We call those parents 'helicopter parents' and complain about the bad behaviour of their 'snowflakes'.
I've taught my kids that inappropriate content exists and that I don't want them watching it. They also know that I will randomly pop my head in once in a while to see what's on their screens. And they know I have the ability to monitor their network connection if I want to do so. They generally stick to the kid-approved sources and it's nice to know that the content therein is well filtered so I don't have to be too concerned or vigilant.
I also know they're sneaking peaks at stuff they shouldn't. As long as it's not totally out of bounds and it's not happening frequently... so what? They're kids and that's part of growing up.
I don't know about you, but when I was a kid I saw a porn magazine or two when I was far younger than I should have been, and I occasionally snuck some inappropriate late-night television movies into my schedule when I was a bit older. I'm pretty sure I'm mostly undamaged.
"The first line of defense for YouTube Kids are algorithmic filters. After that, there is a team of humans that review videos which have been flagged. If a video with recognizable children's characters gets flagged in YouTube's main app, which is much larger than the Kids app, it will be sent to the policy review team. YouTube says it has thousands of people working around the clock in different time zones to review flagged content. If the review finds the video is in violation of the new policy, it will be age restricted, automatically blocking it from traveling to the Kids app."
Yes but this process has been failing. What is different about Alphabet's new process that will change anything?
If they were going to do it, they would already have done it. There is so much law, and liability, and threat of brand damage for harming children.
They know cars. They know laws about cars. The vast majority of new laws are because of lawsuits by insurance companies surrounding child harm. They knew a long time ago.
What they are doing right now is placating the public because of a news story.
How you are going to tell if they care about kids.
- one can differentiate child from adult by usage. Netflix has done it for years. There are "eigen-paths", characteristic trajectories in the viewing space that indicate the nature of the viewer. If you don't know what that is, this conversation is above your head, get someone with a brain to come do your thinking. When google applies their beloved markov chains (go see the claims in their patents to get a sense of how critical this tool is to their "magic smoke") to differentiating the level of maturity of the user, and then selects away from the dopamine addicting them, then they might be about protecting them instead of prematurely product-izing them. Does social media addiction to the micro-dopamine hits predispose individuals to higher levels of addiction to dopamine impacting drugs like opiods? By asking the question now, you can expect google to try and show how evil they are by sculpting the demographics away from their apparent culpability over the next 5 years.
- if they change the commercials that get associated with the kids videos. This is them talking with their money, not some sock-puppet.
- if they implement a deeply draconian rule, like sexual predators on children under age 13, or age 17, are ACTUALLY banned instead of just theoretically banned. That would help.
I expect them to do what they so consistently do: f* the serf class.
lol, you seem to think that the law turns off sexual desire...I mean we are all just animals right? I remember a girl in 6th grade with D-cups...she turned every mans head. Could you resist her if she had a thing for you? I know that's not what the story is, but it doesn't add up...why would you leave your 14 year old girl alone with a grown man, and why would you allow her to go over to his place alone. I'm not even be comfortable leaving my 14 year old alone with male family members, let alone a complete stranger!!
Ever since Alphabet bought YouTube, they have been running it into the ground in an attempt to turn it into another Netflix. Many of their content creators have had to resort to Patrion for monitization and most of creators even slightly right of Stalin are opening channels on vid.me, Minds.com, Bitchute, and Twitch as they find their videos placed demonitized, and/or placed in restricted state.
Any opinion that is not acceptably leftist is absolutely not tolerated at google.
Conservative opinions are often demonetised, sandboxed, age restricted, or outright censored.
Speaking of whitelists.... why in the name of FUCK is there a children's service not running on whitelisted content...? Have people not figured out after 20+ years that the blacklisting paradigm DOES NOT WORK...?
"Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
If your youtube channel want to target children, why not vet them as "safe" first? As a content creator, you can request the vetting required to be viewable by youtube kids which may include signing a contract that requires adherence to the guidelines of youtube kids content. If you get vetted and violate the guidelines, google hauls your ass to court for breach of contract and punishes you for abusing their platform to traumatize children. Producers of Robot Chicken-style content would not pursue this vetting and therefore not be visible to kids but still available to their adult target audience.
I've seen this stuff first hand and it's kind of shocking. My four year old daughter was watching Frozen or My Little Pony videos on my tablet, I hear screams coming from whatever she's watching so I look, and its a crudely animated parody of My Little Pony where everything is getting killed and full of foul language, it made South Park look tame. It was the kind of stuff 15 year old me would of thought was funny, but not a little girl. So the YouTube thing pretty much ended then and there. She has the run of NetFlix Kids now though.
Glad the new people made Google do something about it. You can blame the parents or whatever you want, but the end result is kids who are being exposed to messed up stuff is a problem, and they aren't wise enough to avoid it themselves.
Jesus shit-fucking Christ... are you really defending pedophilia? What the Bloody-tampon Mary is wrong with you?
Yeah, you don't get to swing the SJW bat when you're crying about how your autistic child is so much of a handful that you expect an online media company to do your parenting for you. You're on the wrong side of that one, and the apple didn't fall far from the tree if you can't figure that out.
Have you considered Disney videos or other such reliable pre-vetted content? Think of Disney what you will but it's not going to traumatize your kids (note that I said your kids, not you.) Your daughter is not really going to know the difference. Just pleasant images and soothing voices.
I'm pretty sure I'm mostly undamaged.
Well, you're posting here, so...
They should pull all the cartoons from broadcast TV and replace them with something more educational...
like S O C C E R
I said soccer because the word football means something very very different to most Americans.
Don't we already know this???