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

YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 1001 posts

Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform

#41

Post by throw310822 »

Pet_Ant wrote: post #29
ultra_nick wrote: post #15

[flagged]

It's not a matter of guilt, it's a matter of profitability. If there were advertisers beating down their doors now to get their products placed alongside Russel Brand's face they'd leave him monetised. YouTube is truly neutral here, they are just revenue maximizing, don't mistake this for a moral position. If they make a statement later, it'll be for ROI as well.

Can't advertisers just explicitly ask not to have their ads run on RB's contents? Why would YT have to take this decision for them?

Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform

#42

Post by realce »

tmikaeld wrote: post #33
realce wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're still hosting the videos, still running ads, but YT keeps all the money. Seems... not right and backwards to me.

Hosting isn't free and they're not forcing anyone to host it there, there are alternative platforms.

You're right, Youtube isn't forced to host the works of this horrid rule-breaker. They choose the position of platforming him and profiting off of him however.

Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform

#43

Post by jahsome »

_mxdo wrote: post #39
jahsome wrote: post #23

When a channel is demonetized does that mean YouTube doesn't run ads at all on the channel's content, or do they still run ads and just don't pay out the share to the creator?

YouTube ads are a tiny % of revenue. Celebrities on YT make their money from brand deals, not ads. Remember "Adpocalypse" and the beginning of all this ultra clean PC talk online? Before all that, sure you could make a living from YT ads, but many channels don't even have them on because it's cents. For example I have over 50k views on some videos, but the ad revenue is nothing.

That's not what I asked.

Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform

#46

Post by throw310822 »

Synaesthesia wrote: post #6

Advertising companies hate controversy.

"Controversy" == "media campaigns accusing advertisers of doing something nefarious". Let's not pretend that the "controversy" is some grassroot movement in which many people, independently of one another, decide they're offended by a brand advertising alongside a content they don't even watch.

Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform

#47

Post by cameldrv »

gdulli wrote: post #32
kumarvvr wrote: post #13

[flagged]

> So, this is literally, "an allegation is enough" scenario. If you're a private entity without the investigative powers of law enforcement, then public knowledge and your best judgement better be enough, because they're all you have. > Whatever happened to "innocent until proven guilty" ? That's a standard of the legal system. Private parties have lesser powers of punishment and investigation, so correspondingly a l…

Of course the issue is that Google is not just a “private party” like you or I. It is a 190,000 person organization worth almost 2 trillion dollars. They have a huge market share for monetized video hosting.

If there were 100 nearly equally sized video platforms your argument would me much more persuasive, but at YouTube’s size, to me, they have an obligation to treat video creators with a greater degree of fairness and formal process.

If Google does not want to do this, perhaps they are simply too big and should be broken up.

Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform

#48

Post by SmarsJerry »

kumarvvr wrote: post #13

[flagged]

It’s not even an allegation, it’s a news story. It’s pretty crazy that they would do this because of a story, not even criminal charges being brought. Apparently you don’t even have to get formally accused anymore. People say “it’s bad for advertising” but these acts of extreme abuse of moderation on YouTube have hugely contributed to other websites springing up. I have no doubt their market share overall is slipping despite their revenue growing, it will only be a matter of time before advertisers realize they can get more eyes more cheaply elsewhere. We’re long beyond the days where people believe a random advertisement on the same page as some random guy they don’t like matters. Somehow companies are stuck in the idea of the days of television where you sponsored a specific show. Now everyone knows if your advertising on google it doesn’t mean the advertisement agrees with every action of every person who appears in a search result.

Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform

#49

Post by braza »

jahsome wrote: post #23

When a channel is demonetized does that mean YouTube doesn't run ads at all on the channel's content, or do they still run ads and just don't pay out the share to the creator?

Somethings that happen from I remember from other demonetised channels: - no revenue share from YT - no superchats (via YT) - most of the ads are turned off due to brand deals with YT and risk of being associated with some banned channel

Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform

#50

Post by kylebenzle »

jahsome wrote: post #23

When a channel is demonetized does that mean YouTube doesn't run ads at all on the channel's content, or do they still run ads and just don't pay out the share to the creator?

Just checked it.

Went to YouTube.coms Russel Brand page, clicked the shortest video, let it play.

After the video, ad played, then the next Russell Brand video.

Next video was longer and included marked ads throughout the video, clearly pausing the ad content and labeled with a pop-up.

Also, YouTube still has its pop up that say, "Video contains paid promotion," so they know he is profiting off the video and are still allowing it AND YouTube is profiting from ad between videos.

Overall, I'd say YES, they are still allowing ads, they probably just suspended payments for "In-video" YouTube 3rd parts ads, really only 1 of 4 ad types they are serving.

Both YouTube and Russel Brand continue to make money off ads on Russell Brands videos on YouTube.

1. https://youtube.com/clip/UgkxUtzzTeakkcWlZp531K_jZ6JGWUSKbU7...

Post reply on HN