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

Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 316 posts

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#111

Post by umvi »

robbrown451 wrote: post #95
dontbenebby wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm sure these videos do attract some weirdos in the comments, and in the next paragraph Youtube says that they want to moderate that activity, but what else do you do here? Ban kids uploading a video of their innocent pool party because some creeps might enjoy it? What about topless babies? What about the rights of the children? Maybe they should have the right to wait and decide, upon adulthood, whether they want…

Well then you also need to make sure you don't take them outside. Especially not to a swimming pool, or let them participate in gymnastics. There could be creeps present, thinking bad thoughts.

Internet brings this to a massive, billion+ sized audience, though. Say the rate of pedophilia is 1 in a million (I just made that number up). That means there are, on average, 0 creeps watching your kids at gymnastics meets and pools in real life. However, upload as a public video to youtube, and like flies to honey, hundreds of creeps will gravitate toward the video.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#113

Post by briandear »

ceejayoz wrote: post #99
Animats wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but what else do you do here? Not attempt to monetize your family videos. Disable ads on your own videos.[1] [1] http://orgspring.com/turn-off-ads-youtube-videos/

That solves the issue from the advertisers' perspective. It doesn't solve the "pedos are looking at my kid" side of things.

Don’t use YouTube. Photos on Mac and iOS make sharing family videos dead simple. Not sure why anyone uses YouTube to share videos they don’t want to be public.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#114

Post by djsumdog »

Animats wrote: post #39
baddox wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's basically family videos of young girls, the same kind of videos my own sisters would shoot with our dad's camcorder. Your family camcorder videos probably weren't made available for checkout at the public library, filed under "young girls doing gymnastics" in the library's card catalog. If they were, I imagine your family and many members of the public would be creeped out or upset. > but what else do you do h…

but what else do you do here? Not attempt to monetize your family videos. Disable ads on your own videos.[1] [1] http://orgspring.com/turn-off-ads-youtube-videos/

I don't think a lot of parents are. It's more of people ripping (sometimes unlisted) family videos and posting them on accounts with large collections.

The videos themselves aren't really the issue. It's the context they're presented in.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#115

Post by alexis_fr »

komali2 wrote: post #54
AnaniasAnanas wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both a usability nightmare and a sanity nightmare. The content of the comments there is about as bad as facebook's. To be honest if they removed the ability to comment then nothing of value would be lost.

Comments on youtube are far far worse than on facebook, imo. Hit up any tow truck channel and you'll see overt, unhindered racism, for hundreds of comments.

It’s just that you don’t agree with it.

There is a big chiasm between censored internet (Facebook, newspapers) where everything is polished but only reflects 25% of the population, and free internet (the rest) where you get an actual image of diversity. It’s just that you don’t like this diversity and you want them not to exist, but their points are, if not correct, at least vastly unadressed because the visible society despises them.

I defend men’s rights. All of MR forums are underground. They’re not happy, they’re unadressed and despised by society. And that’s 49% of population. Saying men’s rights are a non-issue which should not be adressed and deserves the censorship it has in the above-ground internet is, by nature, discriminatory towards men. It’s just an example, but you won’t be able to keep the pressure cooker very long.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#116

Post by skybrian »

It's not the same, but I'm reminded of the Habitat Chronicles [1]:

"I found myself unable to reconcile the idea of a virtual world, where kids would run around, play with objects, and chat with each other without someone saying or doing something that might upset another. Even in 1996, we knew that text-filters are no good at solving this kind of problem, so I asked for a clarification: 'I’m confused. What standard should we use to decide if a message would be a problem for Disney?'

"The response was one I will never forget: 'Disney’s standard is quite clear: No kid will be harassed, even if they don’t know they are being harassed.'"

So now it's 2019, and here we are. I guess the filters have gotten better. We certainly expect a lot more from them.

[1] http://habitatchronicles.com/2007/03/the-untold-history-of-t...

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#117

Post by [deleted] »

robbrown451 wrote: post #82
malvosenior wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I ask why you would make those videos public, instead of private and sharing them with just people you know?

Because a few people subscribe (family and friends), and I put them in a playlist, and so on. I mean, I don't care. She's just playing at the playground. I didn't think about it at the time, I guess I could, but I don't see why it matters. If I was concerned about anything, it would be about creepy people seeing her in the real world.

[deleted]

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#118

Post by movedx »

robbrown451 wrote: post #67

This just seems ridiculous. I post a lot of videos of my daughter to share with my family and friends, and generally don't care who looks at them any more than I care who looks at her (or what they are thinking) when we are in public. I've gotten a couple creepy comments here and there from random people who found them. (the comments weren't overtly sexual though, but I deleted them anyway) Here's an example of a har…

I personally think you're missing the point of the article.

The content of your videos (based on the example you gave) are harmless. Adorable, in fact. You have a beautiful daughter - congrats. Sadly you're missing the point that you did the uploading, not her.

The article is about children, I'd say around 11-14 in age on average, possibly late teens too, uploading videos of themselves... themselves. And the videos are adorable videos of them down the park in jeans, they're videos of them in bikinis in their bedrooms. Some of them are videos of them sucking on lollipops... I mean really?

Also, the videos being uploading are flags. They're used to signal to pedophiles: there's other content available outside of this video. They're guiding lights for people who wanted darker content.

Your videos are just your videos, and you moderate them. It's not the same thing at all.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#119

Post by robbrown451 »

kelnos wrote: post #88
robbrown451 wrote: post #67

This just seems ridiculous. I post a lot of videos of my daughter to share with my family and friends, and generally don't care who looks at them any more than I care who looks at her (or what they are thinking) when we are in public. I've gotten a couple creepy comments here and there from random people who found them. (the comments weren't overtly sexual though, but I deleted them anyway) Here's an example of a har…

While certainly child predators are an issue, I don't even need to consider this sort of thing from that angle. Why do you need to post publicly rather than marking it as unlisted and sharing the link with people you know and trust? Would you personally like to have a video posted of you in your underwear? Even if that's okay with you, perhaps your daughter will grow up preferring to have a more private life, and to…

As far as underwear goes, no I wouldn't care if I was under age 3 in the photo. Seeing a kid in a diaper is an everyday public thing. In that case, she was in a diaper rather than a bathing suit because she was still diaper age. I don't see it remotely as something to be embarrassed about.

I don't "need" to post publicly but I also have no reason not to. I'm not going to let people having creepy thoughts control my life, unless there is an actual, tangible danger of harm.

Honestly, if I was worried about creeps, I wouldn't let her wear a skirt in public. I see other girls at the playground all the time that make me wince a bit...I'm far more likely to dress my daughter in pants. But at the end of the day, I'm 1000 times more concerned about people in real life than on YouTube....because they are right there.

Re: Nestle, Disney Pull YouTube Ads, Joining Furor Over Child Videos

#120

Post by dopamean »

hombre_fatal wrote: post #2

>On Sunday, Matt Watson, a video blogger, posted a 20-minute clip detailing how comments on YouTube were used to identify certain videos in which young girls were in activities that could be construed as sexually suggestive, such as posing in front of a mirror and doing gymnastics. I looked at some of the videos that appeared in his report and it's basically family videos of young girls, the same kind of videos my ow…

I have looked into this before and one thing I noticed is that the videos with the creepiest comments tend to be reposts. The videos that actually belong to the kids and families who posted them often have their comments disabled. Perhaps YouTube could do more to delete the reposted videos attracting so much perverted attention.
Post reply on HN