|
Discussion: Youtube blatant censorship angers Youtubers
Member Since: 4/6/2014
Posts: 9,220
|
I am against this move. Surely, there are advertisers who do not care or even want to be associated with the more controversial stuff?
But, to counter the claims that YouTubers don't deserve to be paid, how would you feel if you were responsible for the traffic of tens of thousands or millions of people to a website? Granted, the rise of the vlog has kind of ruined YouTube, with everybody just sitting in front of the camera talking about mundane affairs while the video's title is something like "OMG MY NUDES LEAKED AND HERE THEY ARE". That's lame.
But there are many channels that function like a news broadcast or have some sort of production value to them. Those channels will now either lose what made them fun to watch or they'll shut down completely. Do you think that is a good thing? It's just a step towards "We don't want ANY illicit content on YouTube" and the policing continues. I do not stand for it.
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/19/2012
Posts: 29,579
|
"Censorship"?
you're free to make your videos on another site.
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/19/2011
Posts: 34,328
|
Queen CupcakKe is shook
|
|
|
Member Since: 6/19/2012
Posts: 29,579
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Tsuko
This is brilliant news for SJWs because it means people can't make a living off exposing them anymore.
But I understand in a way, because a company wouldn't want their advert paying for a ****ographic or Nazi-supporting video or whatever.
But what about music videos which have swearing or sexual content or gun references, for example?
Now would be a brilliant time for a new video streaming site to start competing with Youtube.
|
Yes I was wondering about this too. Or is Vevo separate?
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 14,949
|
I get both sides. It's kinda ****ed up that you're censoring people who have been in this for years and had an specific audience. Not everything can be rainbows and unicorns.
On the other side I agree that this is basically for free, they do videos and get money in return. Youtube can do what they want, and like someone mentioned it's like not fitting the requirements of an everyday job. I also do feel like these people should get a real job as well. A lot of youtubers already have one, but poor those lazy people that only do this for a living. Get it together.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/19/2013
Posts: 31,020
|
Quote:
Originally posted by highwayuni
The left ruin everything
|
this
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/6/2014
Posts: 13,604
|
WTH? Not very mad, but shouldn't YouTube just focus just putting warning signs on videos instead of censoring them?
|
|
|
Member Since: 3/6/2014
Posts: 13,604
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Artemisia
Yes I was wondering about this too. Or is Vevo separate?
|
VEVO is separate, it is jointly owned by Sony, Universal, Abu Dabi and Google. So whatever happens on YouTube does not affect VEVO, because they purpose of VEVO is music from Sony and Universal, and recently Warner Music (now an independent and privately owned company), YouTube serves all entertainment including music, well except for ****ographic entertainment of course.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/7/2009
Posts: 34,961
|
What does this have to do with 'sjw'? My god this ****ing stupid made up term.
Aren't all types of channels affected by this, both liberal, conservative, right/left wing type of users/channels? They all violate these new rules in some way, especially the controversial topics that's the number one commonality.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/6/2014
Posts: 12,514
|
Why are y'all basic bitches mad that people are making money over youtube videos. This ain't 2006 no more dumb hoes, youtube/insta/snapchat are where money's at.
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 3/3/2012
Posts: 13,073
|
Some of you clearly don't know how to read at a basic level.
YouTube isn't censoring nobody, people who make videos about sensitive topics, use foul language, graphic images, etc, won't get paid for those videos, it's basically like a regular daytime tv show and it makes sense, most of the ads are from regular companies or videogames so why would they want controversial users or videos to represent them?
Besides, this isn't new, videos have been demonetized before, also, youtubers don't make a lot of money from ads so that's why you see them promote random stuff like Best Fiends or unknown apps.
|
|
|
Member Since: 8/30/2011
Posts: 3,378
|
Quote:
Originally posted by AvrilLaQueen
I am a gay atheist and if someone made a Youtube video calling me an f-word worthless satanist, I'd still wouldn't take his video down or censor his bigotry
I am sorry if I am not weak enough to cry about someone's words and opinions as if that would affect my life in any way. Just like if I told him he's stupid redneck deepsh*t. I have the right to call him that way, and he can feel butthurt over my internet comments if he wants to. Y'all so oversensitive over someone's language, as if censoring them would stop them for spreading opinions. Y'all act like christians acted before, censoring opinions that were different from theirs. I don't agree with religions opinions, but I still wouldn't censor them, especially if they are ignorant and I can back them up with arguments and facts, so that people who are neutral on certain subject can see that my point of view is correct and they understand what they're coming from. There's nothing better than seeing someone use bigoted YouTube video and make a response video to them, showing how bigoted those people are, losing their audience.
I am also so amused by people like Mark Dice and the rest of those "illuminati seekers", I cringe and laugh at their videos, but I still wouldn't censor their stupid videos, they are amusing and I can also come to their comments and troll them (like I did when they dragged my faves ), and even better if you are a YouTuber with audience so you can grow bigger and show your audience how these people are ignorant, laughable and stupid. I'm sure most people would feel embarrassed if they still would believe videos that people like Mark Dice make. Plus they make good material to use and make a response video showing how dumb they are. Sorry for my bad English, hopefully you can understand what I am trying to say
|
Ummm you didnt get me. I said that, don't use the SJW crap word to try and blame even yourself for being in charge of youtube and that you demanded the barbaric rules be implemented. Those rules affect everybody, so whoever you think SJW is, it includes you and so should we blame you for owning youtube and implementing the policy? (cause your definitely considered SJW by the majority)
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/1/2014
Posts: 15,921
|
Quote:
Originally posted by L.B GAGA
Ummm you didnt get me. I said that, don't use the SJW crap word to try and blame even yourself for being in charge of youtube and that you demanded the barbaric rules be implemented. Those rules affect everybody, so whoever you think SJW is, it includes you and so should we blame you for owning youtube and implementing the policy? (cause your definitely considered SJW by the majority)
|
well obviously many YouTubers, even those political media sensitive ones like The Young Turks will get affected by this. I, myself, never claimed this is SJW agenda tho
And no, I am not SJW by definition since I do not seek political correctness nor social justice issues and cultural appropriation that far regressive left do. I am a liberal person who disagrees with SJW ideology, much like you even have conservatives who are against far-right-wing regressive conservatives. Especially since ideology behind hardcore SJWs are scientifically and socially incorrect.
|
|
|
Member Since: 9/4/2012
Posts: 12,421
|
Quote:
Originally posted by rivers
Welp, YouTube is a private company, they can do whatever they want
|
exactly
they can go waste their time on vimeo or periscope if they don't like it
|
|
|
Member Since: 1/3/2014
Posts: 15,909
|
Quote:
Originally posted by AvrilLaQueen
well obviously many YouTubers, even those political media sensitive ones like The Young Turks will get affected by this. I, myself, never claimed this is SJW agenda tho
And no, I am not SJW by definition since I do not seek political correctness nor social justice issues and cultural appropriation that far regressive left do. I am a liberal person who disagrees with SJW ideology, much like you even have conservatives who are against far-right-wing regressive conservatives. Especially since ideology behind hardcore SJWs are scientifically and socially incorrect.
|
Love it.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/6/2014
Posts: 9,220
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Aciid
I get both sides. It's kinda ****ed up that you're censoring people who have been in this for years and had an specific audience. Not everything can be rainbows and unicorns.
On the other side I agree that this is basically for free, they do videos and get money in return. Youtube can do what they want, and like someone mentioned it's like not fitting the requirements of an everyday job. I also do feel like these people should get a real job as well. A lot of youtubers already have one, but poor those lazy people that only do this for a living. Get it together.
|
A "real job"? What is that? I dislike a great number of YouTubers but they are making money in an honest fashion. They're not prostitutes, drug dealers or sex traffickers. I also want to point out that not every channel relies on basic means to make a video. Quite a few have big productions. Some are so elaborate that they only post videos once a week, since that is how long it takes to make a video. What exactly makes them lazy though? It's not backbreaking labor but then again neither is most work these days.
If a person or team can amass a following of hundreds of thousands or millions of people, why shouldn't they be paid for that? They are attracting traffic to YouTube and YouTube pays them so that people continue making the content that drives people to YouTube. Imagine if YouTube never gained channels created for profit. It would be a video hosting site where people uploaded skateboard tricks, emo boys kissing and videos of guys punching each other in the gut. Kinda what populated YouTube back in 2006. It was filled with a bunch of crappy videos that people took after school on crappy cell phones. Now, there's pretty much a channel for every lifestyle and they're all using HD cameras and professional editing.
The problem comes in because, like the OP mentions, videos about ACNE are being demonetized. What is offensive about acne? Would it not be helpful to know how to prevent and treat acne? I'm sure any advertisers who want to target certain people or avoid others can easily opt out of them. So the question is why do accounts have to be punished? It feels lazy but more worrying it feels like an excuse to control what content creators do. Even if they can go elsewhere, people have built up an audience and a revenue stream with YouTube. That audience may not travel with them to a new video hosting site.
|
|
|
Banned
Member Since: 3/3/2012
Posts: 13,073
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Can't_M!ss_This
A "real job"? What is that? I dislike a great number of YouTubers but they are making money in an honest fashion. They're not prostitutes, drug dealers or sex traffickers. I also want to point out that not every channel relies on basic means to make a video. Quite a few have big productions. Some are so elaborate that they only post videos once a week, since that is how long it takes to make a video. What exactly makes them lazy though? It's not backbreaking labor but then again neither is most work these days.
If a person or team can amass a following of hundreds of thousands or millions of people, why shouldn't they be paid for that? They are attracting traffic to YouTube and YouTube pays them so that people continue making the content that drives people to YouTube. Imagine if YouTube never gained channels created for profit. It would be a video hosting site where people uploaded skateboard tricks, emo boys kissing and videos of guys punching each other in the gut. Kinda what populated YouTube back in 2006. It was filled with a bunch of crappy videos that people took after school on crappy cell phones. Now, there's pretty much a channel for every lifestyle and they're all using HD cameras and professional editing.
The problem comes in because, like the OP mentions, videos about ACNE are being demonetized. What is offensive about acne? Would it not be helpful to know how to prevent and treat acne? I'm sure any advertisers who want to target certain people or avoid others can easily opt out of them. So the question is why do accounts have to be punished? It feels lazy but more worrying it feels like an excuse to control what content creators do. Even if they can go elsewhere, people have built up an audience and a revenue stream with YouTube. That audience may not travel with them to a new video hosting site.
|
You weren't asking me but almost everyone knows that "real jobs" are the 9 to 5 kind.
YouTube isn't charge of what they decide to monetize, Ad companies are, it's like when ATRL made changes because they were going to lose their right to have ads on the site, YouTube is (mostly) free, their main resource is ads but if a company sees that YT is giving ads to a certain type of content then they will have a nice lil chat about how they should only let certain videos be able to use ads.
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/10/2012
Posts: 17,020
|
Oh, poor them. Time to find an actual job. Or keep doing this for the love and their fans
|
|
|
Member Since: 4/6/2014
Posts: 9,220
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Su-Barbie-A
You weren't asking me but almost everyone knows that "real jobs" are the 9 to 5 kind.
YouTube isn't charge of what they decide to monetize, Ad companies are, it's like when ATRL made changes because they were going to lose their right to have ads on the site, YouTube is (mostly) free, their main resource is ads but if a company sees that YT is giving ads to a certain type of content then they will have a nice lil chat about how they should only let certain videos be able to use ads.
|
Pfft. If somebody is making money to pay their bills and put money away in savings than they're doing something right. What YouTubers do is no different than what real life entertainers do. They provide content and people watch it while both the creator and YouTube profit from it. If you're doing decently on YouTube and gain an online following, sponsors will be wanting you to pimp their product. So if you can make a livable wage off of doing YouTube, I don't see how that's a problem. The 9-5 job pool sucks. In fact all of the time slots suck. You can't fault somebody for making money in a non-traditional way especially when it's not illegal.
YouTube is a part of Google which is a part of Alphabet, one of the biggest companies in the world. They have pull, Google pretty much owns the entire online ad business. But anyway, what I'm saying is that raunchy/crude/whatever videos are still able to be monetized if the only advertisers that show up in their videos are advertisers that want to target that audience. Tv networks like Comedy Central, Spike and Vice would be prime examples of advertisers that would be of interest to people who like adult or mature content. Also, I'm sure their are advertisers who just don't care. I'd say if a company has an issue with their commercials playing before certain kinds of videos, they can personally request to stay off those videos and channels.
I don't think it's best for the future of YouTube if they start alienating content creators. Most of the channels I'm subscribed to would be unable to collect ad revenue. They're not offensive to anybody out of middle school but they do talk about adult issues or swear a lot. If continuing to make videos became an expenditure instead of an income then it's only logical to assume that they're going to reduce the frequency of their uploads or stop them altogether. There are amazing channels on YouTube that rival cable shows, at least in regards to comedy or news. That content helps the rest of the content on YouTube because most people will see a video and link to the next and so on. You don't want to risk quality shows or popular channels leaving the platform. Then they'd just have a bunch of cat videos or other bland content.
|
|
|
Member Since: 5/19/2012
Posts: 5,925
|
What's ATRL's obsession with SJWs
Y'all bring them up in the most random threads
Anyway this is annoying because almost all YouTubers use profanity. Like this isn't the 1800s are we really gonna prevent someone from making money because they cussed?
|
|
|
|
|