Slashdot Mirror
YouTube Is Heading For Its Cambridge Analytica Moment (cnbc.com)
Earlier this week, Disney, Nestle and others pulled its advertising spending from YouTube after a blogger detailed how comments on Google's video site were being used to facilitate a "soft-core pedophilia ring." Some of the videos involved ran next to ads placed by Disney and Nestle.
With the company facing similar problems over the years, often being "caught in a game of whack-a-mole to fix them," Matt Rosoff from CNBC writes that it's only a matter of time until YouTube faces a scandal that actually alienates users, as happened with Facebook in the Cambridge Analytica scandal. From the report: To be fair, YouTube has taken concrete steps to fix some problems. A couple of years ago, major news events were targets for scammers to post misleading videos about them, like videos claiming shootings such as the one in Parkland, Florida, were staged by crisis actors. In January, the company said it would stop recommending such videos, effectively burying them. It also favors "authoritative" sources in search results around major news events, like mainstream media organizations. And YouTube is not alone in struggling to fight inappropriate content that users upload to its platform. The problem isn't really about YouTube, Facebook or any single company. The problem is the entire business model around user-generated content, and the whack-a-mole game of trying to stay one step ahead of people who abuse it.
[T]ech platforms that rely on user-generated content are protected by the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which says platform providers cannot be held liable for material users post on them. It made sense at the time -- the internet was young, and forcing start-ups to monitor their comments sections (remember comments sections?) would have exploded their expenses and stopped growth before it started. Even now, when some of these companies are worth hundreds of billions of dollars, holding them liable for user-generated content would blow up these companies' business models. They'd disappear, reduce services or have to charge fees for them. Voters might not be happy if Facebook went out of business or they suddenly had to start paying $20 a month to use YouTube. Similarly, advertiser boycotts tend to be short-lived -- advertisers go where they get the best return on their investment, and as long as billions of people keep watching YouTube videos, they'll keep advertising on the platform. So the only way things will change is if users get turned off so badly that they tune out. Following Facebook's Cambridge Analytica scandal, people deleted their accounts, Facebook's growth largely stalled in the U.S., and more young users have abandoned the platform. "YouTube has so far skated free of any similar scandals. But people are paying closer attention than ever before, and it's only a matter of time before the big scandal that actually starts driving users away," writes Rosoff.
[T]ech platforms that rely on user-generated content are protected by the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which says platform providers cannot be held liable for material users post on them. It made sense at the time -- the internet was young, and forcing start-ups to monitor their comments sections (remember comments sections?) would have exploded their expenses and stopped growth before it started. Even now, when some of these companies are worth hundreds of billions of dollars, holding them liable for user-generated content would blow up these companies' business models. They'd disappear, reduce services or have to charge fees for them. Voters might not be happy if Facebook went out of business or they suddenly had to start paying $20 a month to use YouTube. Similarly, advertiser boycotts tend to be short-lived -- advertisers go where they get the best return on their investment, and as long as billions of people keep watching YouTube videos, they'll keep advertising on the platform. So the only way things will change is if users get turned off so badly that they tune out. Following Facebook's Cambridge Analytica scandal, people deleted their accounts, Facebook's growth largely stalled in the U.S., and more young users have abandoned the platform. "YouTube has so far skated free of any similar scandals. But people are paying closer attention than ever before, and it's only a matter of time before the big scandal that actually starts driving users away," writes Rosoff.
IMDB removed their comments sections entirely rather than police them.
Youtube's comments are more integral to the service, but if Youtube is going to be have to do more about them then respond to user complaints, they might find it easier to just shut that crap down preemptively.
YouTube isn't a social network. The controversy, such as it is, doesn't have anything to do with privacy. Also YouTube hasn't done anything dodgy or illegal, they've just responded poorly to a very minor bit of bad publicity.
This'll blow over, some full time YouTubers will sadly lose out (and we'll lose out on some good content) and YouTube will go on.
The CA thing was a mess because not only was there privacy concerns but there was the stink of corrupt American politics all over it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Sure, I was alienated by the Cambridge Analytica scandal, as was another nerd I know, but that's it in my circle of acquaintances, and neither of us gave up our accounts. When I brought up the scandal at a get-together, nobody else had even heard of it, and the conversation shifted to how much everybody likes Facebook.
Honestly, I don't think Youtube can be blamed for the, admittedly clever, use of its comment system for nefarious reasons. If there is something they can do to stifle those uses, great...but it doesn't seem like there would be a bullet-proof, or even half-good, solution.
i hope the producers of this ""soft-core pedophilia" " content are punished severely.
Basically, with the new "comments on your video can get you demonetized" policy is going to slowly strangle the content creator community.
Because it favors established creators with multiple revenue streams already established.
And it is slowly looking to present an insurmountable barrier to entry for NEW creators.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
1. Fire all of the SJWs who continue to lose their shit that there are still Nazis howling from the virtual street corner. In 2019, anyone obsessed with Nazis should be assumed to either be a closet Nazi or sexually fetishizing them; either of which is moral turpitude for employment purposes as far as I'm concerned.
2. Abolish the whole ad system in favor of an ad marketplace that takes all of the ML engineers off of hunting Nazis and focusing on finding quality content creators to line up with big name advertisers who must then sign a digital contract saying "yes, we reviewed this and yes we accept full responsibility for all harm YouTube and other producers suffer if we pull out because this producer does some shit that offends us rather than just severing ties with them."
3. Give every non-premium creator a disk space quota.
4. Impose the video game rating system on content with severe penalties for any obvious attempt to evade it.
5. Create a credit system with no transaction fees that encourages people to pay for content. I would go as far as allowing people to offer up a single penny with payments happening every 90 days once a producer has made at least $5.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So you are fine with Youtube getting all that content for free while you pay them for it. I for one would rather consider to pay the authors of the videos, not Youtube.
Will creators still be paid with YouTube Premium?
"Yes, of course. In fact, YouTube Premium provides a secondary revenue stream for creators in addition to what you're already earning today through ads."
https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6306276#YouTube_Red_revenue_1
it's only a matter of time until YouTube faces a scandal that actually alienates users, as happened with Facebook in the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
Only one problem -- that never happened. Since the so-called "Cambridge Analytica scandal", Facebook's average daily user numbers have gone up, not down.
This is just more fake outrage over another phony scandal.
I already pay and have an ad free experience.
I use an ad blocker and have an ad free experience.
What's your point?
Advertisers are sensitive to media outrage, manufactured or not. And YouTube is sensitive to advertisers, since those are their major source of income.
If YouTube actually wanted to do something about pedophiles abusing their platform via comments, they would either identify and ban the accounts making those comments or, if that is too much work or ineffective, disable comments altogether on content featuring children. Instead, they are demonetizing videos, in other words: not showing ads on them. They're pretending to protect children, but all that move protects is the advertisers.
Facebook lost young users long before the CA incident. i work with teens and Facebook stopped being used by them in the '00s. Facebook is used by their parents and they don't want anything to do with it.
Nah.
85% of all content is garbage. 85% of all books are garbage. 85% of all TV is garbage. 85% of all movies are garbage. YouTube is not better or worse in that regard than any other content source.
But since YouTube has over 7 billion videos that means ther are 1.4 billion videos that are not garbage. Certainly compared the professional media that's way more decent stuff than they put out.
Once again a what was once a college project used by a few thousand has morphed into a multi-billion dollar corporate enterprise, sadly those still running it like it's a little college server for a few laughs.
Some people are scum and they will ruin things that most of us are happy to use for a fun. As anyone who works in retail will tell you, it's always the 5% that are the most difficult to deal with but sadly everything has to be geared up to deal with the minority and the trouble they cause, it's never the 95% who will happily just get along with everyone else.
Youtube, like Facebook and Instagram all need to learn to grow up and get serious. These companies have now had at least a minimum of a decade to learn how the real internet works with real people, they need to shape up or just drop it before they go the way of Yahoo and MySpace.
Did anything happen to FB? Did they change any practices? Did they stop gathering data from non-members? Did it effect their long term revue or stock?
The answer to all is a "no"... there's no consequences for corporate oligarchs.
Amazing how difficult it is to police freedoms, is it not? Their excuse of, "we're too big to police ourselves" can't work forever.
Certainly compared the professional media
Which part of the good stuff in Youtube is not professional? When I look into my TY subscriptions, they are either traditional media putting videos on YT, trade professionals who increase their visibility by posting videos, people who have so many views, that they can monetize from TY ads, patreon or in-video ads.
If whatever amateur videos become good enough, they tend to become professional, because why not take money, if it;s there.