Live data from Hacker News

YouTube Demonetization Screenshot Leaks and Secret YouTube Meeting

twitlonger.com

101–110 of 256 posts

Re: YouTube Demonetization Screenshot Leaks and Secret YouTube Meeting

#101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Automatic detection of curse words and nudity does work, as far as I know. The regular categorization should be left to the publishers, but it should be much wider and multilevel, not the current choice of, what, 10 categories? Yes, other things like hate speech are harder to detect, but, as I said, it's extremely subjective, and should not be dealt with in a general way, but rather broken down into subcategories, li…

Yes, other things like hate speech are harder to detect Exactly. but, as I said, it's extremely subjective, and should not be dealt with in a general way, but rather broken down into subcategories, like "religion criticism", "radical feminism", "men's rights", etc, whatever ruffles people's feathers these days. Unless you have some reason to think that a non-insignificant number of advertisers would be OK with ads on…

  that's just pointless busywork.
Not at all - Youtube could use a complex, multi-layered system to deflect blame from themselves.

"Oh, we didn't demonetise your video, we just give advertisers tools to choose what sort of content they want their ads to show alongside. And your video is rated 'gender insensitivity level 1' because you said 'motherboard' instead of 'mainboard'. It's the advertisers' fault you made much less money on this one."

If Youtube make a clear line, they have to take a stance on whether saying 'motherboard' should be allowed or not, and whatever choice they make some people will protest. If instead they have eight categories of offensive content and twenty thresholds in each, they can outsource the decision on whether saying 'motherboard' is allowed to anonymous advertisers' marketing departments - YT can avoid taking a stance at all.

Re: YouTube Demonetization Screenshot Leaks and Secret YouTube Meeting

#102
post #30

Google is an American company. Their "rules" are extremely embedded in a US culture. Unfortunately YouTube is a product that is consumed worldwide. Many of the regions where it has a dominant market share for web VoD do have cultural palates that are very different from the US. I feel Google should embrace their international position and be less biased in it's reasoning.

What culture-specific reasonings are you referring to, exactly?

In some countries, exposing children to advertising would be considered inappropriate.

In some places, nudity and sex are considered fine for children.

In some places, LGBT topics, or even showing people who are openly gay discussing something entirely unrelated would be considered unacceptable.

In some places, standards for nudity are very different, for example failure to wear a headscarf would be unacceptable in parts of the world.

Re: YouTube Demonetization Screenshot Leaks and Secret YouTube Meeting

#103

I don't see anything wrong with that. Google did this before to fight search engine spam. Top positions for money keywords in search results were manually reviewed by humans. Now advertisers do not want to be advertised on specific videos to avoid risk of brand damage.

This isn't true.

Top positions were reviewed to determine the best parameters.

A review didn't affect that one individual sites ranking, but all sites as a whole.

Re: YouTube Demonetization Screenshot Leaks and Secret YouTube Meeting

#105

These rules seem incredibly strict, in a way that could seriously limit original content. If I was to make a show similar to Trailer Park Boys, about a bunch of comedic stoners bumbling around and swearing a bunch, it would be demonetized. Trailer Park Boys is a good example, since it's a show that you could produce on a minimal budget and try to launch on Youtube.

I believe advertisers can still choose to advertise on specific demonetized videos or channels, so if this is your content, you could still approach advertisers directly.

Re: YouTube Demonetization Screenshot Leaks and Secret YouTube Meeting

#106
I know some people are happy about this happening because currently the demonetisation matches their own beliefs/politics/dislikes.

What happens though if this is outsourced out from Americans doing the moderation to cheap labour in other nations that don't share your beliefs or politics.

If one thing is clear it's that we need competition in this space.

Re: YouTube Demonetization Screenshot Leaks and Secret YouTube Meeting

#107
Maybe this is real, but it doesn't seem to line up with what I have heard from other Youtubers.

Firstly it is almost certain that a video is initially demonetized by an algorithm. Only during a manual review is it looked at by a human.

The main complaint from Youtubers is that the algorithm is way too strict and inconsistent. But the manual review process is pretty fair and the vast majority of videos get remonetized. The issue here being that by the time a manual review is complete most of the views for a video have already happened.

I could of missed it, but I have seen very few complaints about the manual review process being overly strict or biased.

Re: YouTube Demonetization Screenshot Leaks and Secret YouTube Meeting

#108

Maybe this is real, but it doesn't seem to line up with what I have heard from other Youtubers. Firstly it is almost certain that a video is initially demonetized by an algorithm. Only during a manual review is it looked at by a human. The main complaint from Youtubers is that the algorithm is way too strict and inconsistent. But the manual review process is pretty fair and the vast majority of videos get remonetized…

Couldn't the algorithm give its judgement before the video goes live?

Re: YouTube Demonetization Screenshot Leaks and Secret YouTube Meeting

#109

Maybe this is real, but it doesn't seem to line up with what I have heard from other Youtubers. Firstly it is almost certain that a video is initially demonetized by an algorithm. Only during a manual review is it looked at by a human. The main complaint from Youtubers is that the algorithm is way too strict and inconsistent. But the manual review process is pretty fair and the vast majority of videos get remonetized…

> The issue here being that by the time a manual review is complete most of the views for a video have already happened.

Wouldn't the solution, then, be to credit the account for the revenue generated while it was demonetized? It's not like Youtube didn't get revenue from ad impressions while the video was flagged.

Re: YouTube Demonetization Screenshot Leaks and Secret YouTube Meeting

#110
post #6

I have a feeling that the internet will get outraged about this for one reason or another, but just from looking at this, it actually seems like a sensible policy designed to keep YouTube out of trouble. Nothing extreme or unfair, just avoiding to show ads next to stuff advertisers would not want to see their ads next to, while also making an effort to avoid offending or censoring youtubers. Probably won't be flawles…

A big problem is that youtubers do not know the reasons for the demonetization, so creators have to guess what is the problem, an example was a Linux video, nothing was bad with the video, people were speculating that maybe the problem was the word "bash" but we can't know if this word is on a blacklist or not.

My wife runs a "mom vlog" mostly recipes, lifestyle things, how tos, etc. Since late October her content is regularly demonetized with no indications as to what's wrong.

Her content is literally some of the most desirable, adfriendly content on YouTube.

No idea why they don't have a whitelist for channels with 10 years of a spotless record.

Post reply on HN