Slashdot Mirror
YouTube Warns of 'Consequences' For Creators Who Misbehave (cnbc.com)
YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki has announced that creators whose actions impact negatively on its community will face "consequences." From a report: Wojcicki said the video-sharing platform is developing new policies that "would lead to consequences" if a content creator "does something egregious" that reflects unfavorably on other YouTube creators. YouTube's CEO made the comments in a blog post that detailed a list of the Google-owned firm's priorities for creators in 2018. In January, one of the service's most popular content creators, Logan Paul, published a video that showed the dead body of a man hanging from a tree. Wojcicki did not refer to the Logan Paul incident directly, but said that the misbehavior of some creators could put the broader YouTube community in a negative light. "While these instances are rare, they can damage the reputation and revenue of your fellow creators, so we want to make sure we have policies in place that allow us to respond appropriately," she said.
And still no real response to Elsa-gate.
"Prediction: within 10 years, Windows will be a Linux distribution." Me, 7-6-2016
I wonder when they'll extend their definition of "to misbehave" to include people who are critical of their services/policies...
It'll probably just be the "Reported for Community Standards violations", except instead of 1 Strike you lose Partner status and 3 Strikes you're banned from Google services with all your video's taken down ----- one strike and you're banned, and as a side penalty you can no longer use Google Search, and you'll lose access to your Gmail account, Google Drive account, etc, at the same time.
I say this as a European socialist. Wojcicki is a cunt and Youtube suffers from it.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Also, politics, it seems as if YouTube see one side as misbehavior more than the other.
A video that became popular from the Greek right-wing/nationalist party Golden Dawn (elected in parliament ranking third in votes) was removed by YouTube as "hate-speech"...
The video was a photography of an Athens center square in the 50's and a love song from that era with the lyrics (roughly translated by me) "I wish you could come back again, even for just a night"...
With no text (other than "Golden Dawn") and none copyrights violations, neither for the photograph nor for the song... the solution for YouTube was to characterize it... "hate-speech" (a photography of an Athens center square in the 50's and a love song from that era...)!
Oh, right. Because there's no real competitor.
They killed me with the copyright review process. I can't even get one because my views are too low.
They killed me when they de-monitized all the small channels.
The threaten to take action against "bad actors" and people who "misbehave" without defining the terms. I mean, I was never a great actor, but I don't think I qualified as a bad one. At least I hope not.
And I do misbehave from time to time.
I'm having a really hard time wondering why I don't dump YouTube in favor of Facebook. At least there I have some chance of growing an audience. As it stands, YouTube has made it essentially impossible.
There needs to be a competitor -- and I mean a competitor, not these "Hey, look at this, they're using a distributed infrastructure and blockchain tech!"
Yeah, that's fine and all. I'm the first one to hop as soon as it takes off or shows signs of growing. I need eyes to grow an audience. The only other services that come close to the number of eyes are Dailymotion (French) and VK (Russian).
Maybe I'll just go to VK. Amazingly, there's considerably more free speech on a frakking Russian website than there is on YouTube at the moment.
There needs to be a competitor. A real one. Anybody got about $50 million so I can get it off the ground?
Microsoft leads to Bluescreen; Bluescreen leads to downtime; downtime leads to suffering.
It's kinda sad that you guys are still upset about that. She finished that series a couple of years ago now, and moved on to moaning about Star Trek Discovery.
It's also kinda frustrating that I need to remind you that disagreement isn't trolling.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
You have to realize that to "monetize" a video, there has to be an ad for it. And maybe just over a year ago, that wasn't a problem - there were lots of advertisers.
The big problem is YouTube's advertisers are running thin. When thanks to the opinions of a certain president, certain views started getting rather high visibility, and the press surrounding those videos suddenly caused a lot of advertisers to wake up and take notice - their ads were playing on those videos.
You have to realize an advertiser is a thin skinned human with a bankroll, and the only way to get them to release that bankroll is to stay on the straight and narrow. So a LOT of big name advertisers pulled their ad contracts from YouTube the first time it happened. It happened again a month later, and even more advertisers pulled out.
So basically of what's left, YouTube has to ensure that they don't get up and leave as well. So producing a video that harms the YouTube community may be demonetized because it has the potential of losing advertisers.
And that's what matters. If you want money, you need ads. Advertisers are thin skinned and if you're not on the straight and narrow on what values they promote, they will refuse to put an ad on your video and thus, your video does not get monetized because there's no one to pay for it.
Unfortunately, a lot of outdoorsy type videos fall under this - guns are especially hard thanks to all the mass shootings, so advertisers really hate associating their product with something that could cause another Las Vegas.
The gravy train has basically come to a halt. At least YouTube still keeps the video up - and until someone wants to advertise on those kinds of videos, they can't be monetized.
And no, the alternatives will have to face exactly the same problem - Steem and DTube, short of charging people money to view the videos, will have to rely on the same kinds of advertisers that YouTube goes after. Well, they could go after the crapware advertisers, you know, the ones that will advertise on any site regardless of content, mostly because the ads are deceptive, illegal, and will be the kind that install 10 kinds of malware on your computer. They're the ones you find on torrent sites and other questionable content sites.