Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#21

Post by hobofan » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 9:27 AM UTC

donatj wrote: post #15

fixermark wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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

I mean we are both speculating here unless there is some data to prove our claims, but I would say that Google dropped any attempt at keeping the brands too separate when they introduced the Google+ comment section.

The "Google preferred" also makes sense because all advertising that happens on Youtube is under the Google AdWords brand. There is no Youtube Ads, only Google Adwords for video.

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#22

Post by dbbk » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 10:08 AM UTC

This is a strange headline, because the whole premise of Google Preferred is that it IS vetted. Now Google is admitting that it... wasn't? Or at least rarely.

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#23

Post by dbbk » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 10:12 AM UTC

donatj wrote: post #15

fixermark wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't think so. The advertising business is all named under Google, e.g. Google AdWords and Google AdSense. Even the YouTube-specific TrueView ads fall under AdWords.

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#24

Post by gimmeayrwlt » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 1:38 PM UTC

Google vetting ? Oh please, google just could stop delete people's accounts for bogus reasons.

Google do not want to give anybody freedom of speech, that's the fact.

Same goes twitter and Facebook.. useless media sites if try to say anything else than "look me" "follo me" "support hillary" "clinton is innocent" all fake news!!

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#25

Post by slivym » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 4:55 PM UTC

mc32 wrote: post #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 t…

This seems like a defensive no brainer for youtube though. The classic cable business model is to get subscribers by financing top content that brings in viewers. If Disney opened a 'Mickey Tube' tomorrow with exlusive access to all the late show clips, several well-financed existing youtubers then how much of youtubes viewers would pack up and move over?

So really this looks like Youtube maturing into a more traditional media business model. Of course they still have the risk that they suffer from the myspace phenomenom. Not sure they're really preparing or considering that.

Re: Google Plans to Vet YouTube Premium Video Content

#26

Post by slivym » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 5:03 PM UTC

dbbk wrote: post #22

This is a strange headline, because the whole premise of Google Preferred is that it IS vetted. Now Google is admitting that it... wasn't? Or at least rarely.

Google's entire tradition of content moderation has been to have accounts with privileges and then add/remove those based on content produced. Google Preferred wasn't a set of videos you could advertise on, it was a set of content creators you could advertise with.

There was a watershed early last year when they realized that a relatively tiny number of videos could be picked up by traditional media and used to beat up youtube in the press. So now they're moving away from that. They're going to moderate every video.

That started with the low cost: everything monetized goes through the iron fist of the Youtube demonetization wizard.

Now for the high end content they can't treat people like that - because top talent has leverage. So the more the content is worth, the more they'll spend on QA. The fundamental doesn't change though - they're moderating the content not the creator anymore.