Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
"A tiny %" to me would be 1, maybe 2%. Do you really believe he's earning $100 mil a year? I read that his estimated worth is in the low 20 millions but I can't recall where I saw that.
[deleted]
YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform
241–250 of 1001 posts
Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform
#242[flagged]
Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform
#243> “If a creator’s off-platform behavior harms our users, employees or ecosystem, we take action to protect the community,” the spokeswoman said.
Putting aside the validity of the accusations—let's say he did everything he's accused of, for the sake of argument—is Youtube alleging that he assaulted Youtube employees, app developers who use the Youtube ecosystem, or Youtube users? I assume the latter. But the thing is, a majority of people on Earth are Youtube users, so what the heck does that even mean?
I have no dog in this fight, Russell Brand's fate is not of interest to me. I'm just wondering about the argument they are making, and how broad it seems. If any alleged crime takes place wherein the victim has watched at least one Youtube video at some point in their life, and the perpetrator has a monetized Youtube channel, will Youtube's policy be to step in and protect the victim? For example, if I am YT creator and I punch someone in a bar, and that someone has a Youtube subscription, does Youtube step in? That feels like the kind of policy that cannot be faithfully and objectively executed, which makes it a bad policy and a potential legal vulnerability for Youtube.
Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform
#244Earlier 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.
Indeed. If his videos are unacceptable, YT should have taken them down. If they're acceptable, then they should give him his money.
I would put forward that a less morally dubious way for YT to handle this would be to pull ads, and send the creator a pay-for-hosting agreement that they're required to sign if they want to keep the content online.
Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform
#245No clue whether Brand is innocent or guilty before the law, but if he's exonerated would he have grounds to sue YouTube/Google or do the terms of service allow YouTube to demonetize people based on accusations even if they turn out to be false at a later time?
Not really, YouTube can terminate your account for any reason. If the accusations are false, and if they're the reason why he lost monetization, he could sue the accusers for damages.
Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform
#246Putting aside recent allegations, it's disappointing what has happened to Russell Brand's YouTube channel. I watched some of his videos a few years ago and they were interesting discussions of the news with a particular emphasis on questioning everything which I see as a healthy habit. Inevitably though, the algorithm steered the videos to become more clickbaity, divisive, and frankly crazy. He probably saw that outr…
Can say the same thing about Jordan Peterson, no? Content from 5-10 years ago was interesting. Now I have him muted on X.
I'm convinced that these platforms are a huge driver, if not the main driver of social and political polarisation.
Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform
#247Putting aside recent allegations, it's disappointing what has happened to Russell Brand's YouTube channel. I watched some of his videos a few years ago and they were interesting discussions of the news with a particular emphasis on questioning everything which I see as a healthy habit. Inevitably though, the algorithm steered the videos to become more clickbaity, divisive, and frankly crazy. He probably saw that outr…
The difference between questioning everything and rejecting everything from the mainstream is an important one which Brand and many others seem not to understand.
A very good concise insight
Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform
#248Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe this should be reconsidered when a "private company" controls a large majority of humanity's social fabric and/or popular culture?
This is why developer and hacker community should strive to build open networks, and then have them adopted. This was what early internet was like: Usenet, IRC, etc.
Yes, but I would also add that it is important that the rest of the world should stop using services from American companies.
Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform
#249Putting aside recent allegations, it's disappointing what has happened to Russell Brand's YouTube channel. I watched some of his videos a few years ago and they were interesting discussions of the news with a particular emphasis on questioning everything which I see as a healthy habit. Inevitably though, the algorithm steered the videos to become more clickbaity, divisive, and frankly crazy. He probably saw that outr…
Can say the same thing about Jordan Peterson, no? Content from 5-10 years ago was interesting. Now I have him muted on X.
I think both Peterson and Brand were always these people, social media just allows them to monetise it.
Re: YouTube blocks Russell Brand from making money through its platform
#250No clue whether Brand is innocent or guilty before the law, but if he's exonerated would he have grounds to sue YouTube/Google or do the terms of service allow YouTube to demonetize people based on accusations even if they turn out to be false at a later time?
Not a lawyer (barrister?), but no. Generally, businesses are not obligated to do business with folks they dislike.
This is not true. Courts continually hold that a business must serve persons they don't like or agree with.