Live data from Hacker News

Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

bloomberg.com

11–20 of 26 posts

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#11
post #7

"the company recently announced it will have 10,000 employees focused on the task" I can't wrap my head around that number. How can that be true?

Maybe most of them are not exactly google full time employees?

I would speculate most of these employees are outsourced workers from countries like the Philippines (see for a recent discussion of this: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/03/comme...)

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#12
post #6

I’m not a vet, so I won’t comment on the subject itself, but on a related note, I always found “Google Preferred” to be a bizarre naming choice. Why would a global, and generally loved brand, use the name of another to market a product?

YouTube is owned by Google.

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#13
I don't know how many people (contributors) they have in these preferred channels --maybe they have overwhelming numbers so they have to throw unspecialized bodies at the issue.

My feeling is that at some point they will manage the top tier of their premium contributors more like traditional content production. Idea people, writers, producers and someone who vets the output yay/nay and takes full responsibility for the release of the content. None of this "the views of [contributor] do not represent the values of our company" BS.

Of course, that means more money, less profit but would make things for advertisers palatable.

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#15
post #6

I’m not a vet, so I won’t comment on the subject itself, but on a related note, I always found “Google Preferred” to be a bizarre naming choice. Why would a global, and generally loved brand, use the name of another to market a product?

YouTube is owned by Google.

Even so. It’s a strange use of branding. It would be like Beats having a line of “Apple Preferred” headphones.

In the eyes of many consumers they’re unrelated because they’ve up until now pushed very separate branding.

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#16
post #6

I’m not a vet, so I won’t comment on the subject itself, but on a related note, I always found “Google Preferred” to be a bizarre naming choice. Why would a global, and generally loved brand, use the name of another to market a product?

I think it's about Google advertising channels -- with advertising decisions being the driver, not the quality of the content from the Youtube side. The main consumers of this designation are potential Google customers, not Youtube content creators or users.

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#18

"the company recently announced it will have 10,000 employees focused on the task" I can't wrap my head around that number. How can that be true?

Contractor, like Call center employees. Probably from outsourcing firms. And, this number seems...low? Considering the sheer amount of videos upload even just from partners. I guess those platforms are growing so large and influential, censoring is inevitable now.

Casually calling contractors employees to the press seems like a decent way to open yourself up to a employment status lawsuits.

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#19
This might sound silly, but working in these content moderation jobs must be painful -- dealing with a lot of constant negativity if not abuse, etc.

In some ways, moderating all the good content might give you a break.. I imagine they probably won't cross with other such jobs though.

As a society, online really seems to bring out some of the worst in people; and I figure there is not a set of valued peers around you to try and influence your behaviour for the better.

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Contractor, like Call center employees. Probably from outsourcing firms. And, this number seems...low? Considering the sheer amount of videos upload even just from partners. I guess those platforms are growing so large and influential, censoring is inevitable now.

Casually calling contractors employees to the press seems like a decent way to open yourself up to a employment status lawsuits.

The "employee" word is not mentioned in Google's post a single time.
Post reply on HN