Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YouTube monetization analysis

docs.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 168 posts

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#61

Post by Raphmedia »

iainmerrick wrote: post #41

What is "demonetization"? I've never heard of this before. Does it mean YouTube stops inserting ads in your videos? As a viewer, that sounds pretty great to me. It sounds like they also stop suggesting your video to random viewers, which is understandable if they're not making money off it. Surely the real problem is that ads are toxic, the ad-supported content model is toxic, and YouTube's automatic recommendations…

Youtube content creators rely on ads to make their living. Monetization (ads on videos) are managed automatically by an algorithm. There are a lot of false positive where people spend weeks working on a video and end up getting no revenue for it.

I watch a lot of videos on world history. It happen very often that those YouTubers have their revenue cut off because the video is automatically flagged as "war", "weapons". It's ridiculous since those wars and weapons are those of the ancient world.

Worst than that, recently one big user had his account outright deleted for talking about ninjas and their weaponry in a video uploaded around 10 years ago. The algorithm went through his previous videos and flagged his entire account as undesirable.

See this petition where it took 35k+ users for his account to be restored. https://www.change.org/p/google-inc-reinstate-the-thegnthran...

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#62

Post by dizzystar »

dopamean wrote: post #50
adekok wrote: post #18

I never understood why Youtube didn't have uploaders select various categories for videos. It would do a number of things: * allow them to demonetize / ban / block videos for abuse of categorization * train machine learning on the various categories It's a lot more socially palatable for Youtube to say "Hey guys, we HAVE a blood and violence category, but you didn't use it for this video. So we'll punish you for that…

Other commenters speculate that there is a technical reason why YouTube doesn't allow content producers to choose their monetization categories but I bet it's more likely to be a business reason. I'm sure it would be technically challenging and possibly for not much reward (for Google), however, I bet it's even harder to sell advertisers on ad packages that include Google ads when any producer can opt out of any grou…

People would game the system. I do music, but everyone knows that other categories pay higher.

It also would depend on the audience you naturally attract. Attracting 19 year old girls will do better than 65 year old men.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#63

Post by IceDane »

corey_moncure wrote: post #56
alva wrote: post #52

I am almost certain another factor is clickthrough from "undesirable" referral links. ReviewBrah [0] (The Report of The Week) is the most family friendly channel with high subscribers that I can think of. He reviews fast food and has a unique fashion style and personality. Very clean. He has become a popular meme and is regularly linked to from 4chan. I struggle to find a single thing that could warrant demonetisatio…

Of course, this would mean that YT has handed 4chan a laser cannon to demonetize videos at their discretion.

Someone will read these comments and it will be posted on 4chan within a few minutes, if it hasn't been already.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#65

Post by HuggableSquare »

adekok wrote: post #18

I never understood why Youtube didn't have uploaders select various categories for videos. It would do a number of things: * allow them to demonetize / ban / block videos for abuse of categorization * train machine learning on the various categories It's a lot more socially palatable for Youtube to say "Hey guys, we HAVE a blood and violence category, but you didn't use it for this video. So we'll punish you for that…

YouTube does actually have video categories that the uploader selects, although historically it has led to people mis-categorizing their videos on purpose.

For example, before gaming was a category that was embraced by YouTube, many popular gaming creators would categorize their videos under Comedy instead of Gaming, because the Gaming category did not have a spot on the front page. This also led to a fights between gaming YouTubers over mis-labelling under lesser used categories just to get the top spot and end up on the front page.

As far as I can tell the categories are as follows: Autos and Vehicles, Comedy, Education, Film & Animation, Gaming, Howto & Style, Music, News & Politics, Nonprofits & Activism, People & Blogs, Pets & Animals, Science & Technology, Sports, Travel & Events.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#66

Post by DerfNet »

alva wrote: post #52

I am almost certain another factor is clickthrough from "undesirable" referral links. ReviewBrah [0] (The Report of The Week) is the most family friendly channel with high subscribers that I can think of. He reviews fast food and has a unique fashion style and personality. Very clean. He has become a popular meme and is regularly linked to from 4chan. I struggle to find a single thing that could warrant demonetisatio…

The only other factor I can think of with ReviewBrah is that he's often negatively reviewing products from huge companies (fast food chains) that might advertise on YouTube. Would Burger King want to run an ad before he reviews chicken fries or whatever?

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#67

Post by vbernat »

wybiral wrote: post #15

Every single video, without exception, that I've uploaded in the past few months has been demonetized within a day or two. Then I request manual review and they're monetized again within another day or two. My content is clean and all of it is programming/tech related (programming tutorials and some Raspberry Pi stuff). So if there is an algorithm it's really naive at this stage or it doesn't apply until you request…

Some users are publishing the video as a private video first, get demonetized, ask for the review, the video is monetized again and user can publish it as a public video.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#68

Post by wybiral »

alva wrote: post #52

I am almost certain another factor is clickthrough from "undesirable" referral links. ReviewBrah [0] (The Report of The Week) is the most family friendly channel with high subscribers that I can think of. He reviews fast food and has a unique fashion style and personality. Very clean. He has become a popular meme and is regularly linked to from 4chan. I struggle to find a single thing that could warrant demonetisatio…

Or it's possible that people from those sources report his videos.

But my own videos get demonetized almost instantly and none of mine have weird referral links as far as I can tell.

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#69

Post by adekok »

pwinnski wrote: post #43
adekok wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there is no incentive to not put your videos in as many categories as possible. We are talking about how to incentivize people here... why suddenly decide that there's magically "no incentive" for something? Youtube is free to also de-incentivize people for using the wrong category.

Which they would determine using... an automated algorithm which decides which category a video should be in, and comparing it to the category chosen. At which point...

> At which point...

They have more data than they do now for machine learning, and a better PR story.

i.e. uploaders can't be mad about the categories, because the categories are chosen by the uploader.

Uploaders can be mad about Youtube double-checking the categories and getting it wrong... which is less likely to happen if they have better data for machine learning.

What, exactly, is the down side of that?

Re: YouTube monetization analysis

#70

Post by burger_moon »

wybiral wrote: post #22
RyanShook wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience, Youtube demonetizes based on metadata. So any tags/descriptions with keywords that YT views as “controversial” the system will demonetize regardless of actual content in the video.

I uploaded a video yesterday that's already demonetized. It's part of a series to write an RSS feed reader in Python (specifically the part about adding static files to the server). Tags: python, rss, feedparser, feed reader, news aggregator, flask, css, static files It doesn't seem "controversial" to me.

What's a link to your channel? You've at least got me interested in checking it out.
Post reply on HN