Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized' • Hacker News Board

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#151

Post by emodendroket » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:19 PM UTC

_delirium wrote: post #129

jacquesm wrote: post #82

'De-Monetized' suggests that someone who produces a video has an automatic right to income. That's bonkers, it's already quite a service that Youtube allows you to upload your videos to reach an audience that you'd be hard pressed to serve from your own server. They do this for free. In the previous iteration of such platforms all the ad income would go to the owner of the website, not to the rights owners of the vid…

I don't think this kind of reaction is about philosophical "right" to an income from a particular company, more about sudden changes. It's similar to being fired: you previously got an income from this company, then they decided not to give you an income. Some people get angry at that, and sometimes feel desperate, worried about ending up homeless etc. depending on how much they relied on this income and what kinds o…

Mark Ames wrote a whole book (which I admit I didn't quite finish) with the thesis that you could tie the rise of workplace shootings to an increase in worker precarity.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#152

Post by jacquesm » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:19 PM UTC

_delirium wrote: post #129

jacquesm wrote: post #82

'De-Monetized' suggests that someone who produces a video has an automatic right to income. That's bonkers, it's already quite a service that Youtube allows you to upload your videos to reach an audience that you'd be hard pressed to serve from your own server. They do this for free. In the previous iteration of such platforms all the ad income would go to the owner of the website, not to the rights owners of the vid…

I don't think this kind of reaction is about philosophical "right" to an income from a particular company, more about sudden changes. It's similar to being fired: you previously got an income from this company, then they decided not to give you an income. Some people get angry at that, and sometimes feel desperate, worried about ending up homeless etc. depending on how much they relied on this income and what kinds o…

The problem is - and this goes for all the apologists for this person in this thread - that having your stuff on Youtube isn't a thing you should count on. If you run a small business and you make that business entirely dependent on a third party you are inherently setting yourself up for failure.

Whether it is Youtube, Facebook, Twitch, Medium or any other user generated content site you give up control the moment you start using them and you are essentially working for whatever crumbs they decide to throw your way.

Being fired in many countries actually does come with a whole pile of assurances about your continued income, but it is ridiculous to compare the situation of a content producer on a free platform with the one of a salaried employee.

And to take that anger out on the employees of Youtube is utterly ridiculous, if you feel that there is some form of breach of contract then the courts would be your avenue to seek redress.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#153

Post by psyc » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:19 PM UTC

cal5k wrote: post #95

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually I disagree. Obviously responsibility is shared and primarily owned by Nasim but some is also owned by youtube. Think of it like this - does youtube bear some responsibility when creators leave the platform because of demonetization? Of course. Does youtube bear some responsibility when creators make lots of angry videos because of demonetization? Of course. Does youtube bear some responsibility when demoneti…

Respectfully, that's bullshit. There is nothing that YouTube could have done that makes an active shooter their fault. "Maybe if they hadn't been so mean...". News flash: normal people don't go on a shooting spree when bad things happen in life. This is squarely the fault of a psychologically troubled woman. Discussions about YouTube's monetization policies shouldn't even be part of the story.

There's something akin to burying one's head in the sand about this approach. Implying YouTube has no reason whatsoever to examine itself. The actions of psychopaths can be like canaries. You can say there's no relationship between YouTube and the shooter's actions, but I think that's a bad idea. I believe the drastic rise in mass shootings is itself symptomatic of something. Something that is being drowned out by all the yelling about guns. Why so much rage in a supposedly civilized and wealthy society?

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#154

Post by quickben » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:20 PM UTC

danso wrote: post #27

ep103 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone is acting in their best interest, except youtube. Youtube has a product team, its their job to come up with solutions to problems like these. If they haven't found a solution, they haven't done their job. Full stop.

What is the "solution" here? There is only mitigation, it's not a problem that could ever be completely solved to the satisfaction of all parties.

Foresight and planning. Don't tie to another's platform without expecting cutoffs (pagerank, YouTube, apple front page, amazon serverless , etc)

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#155

Post by untog » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:20 PM UTC

sqdbps wrote: post #2

The media’s part in this: For whatever reason they started scouring youtube for “controversial” videos checking if they had ads (no matter how little views they had) then they would contact the advertisers for comment. Advertisers would initiate damage control and pull their ads from youtube. Youtube would explain that the numbers and views in question are insignificant and that this type of complex system can never…

I guess I'm not seeing where the media's part in this is bad. They're raising legitimate questions about programmatic advertising.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#156

Post by pucke » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:20 PM UTC

leshow wrote: post #104

Klathmon wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is absolutely a "no-win" situation in my mind. Everyone is acting in their best interests, and in many cases are acting benevolently, but the outcome is still awful. Obviously YouTube is going to cave to advertiser pressure and start to restrict what videos can have ads, their whole existence depends on it, and if I worked at YouTube i'd see demonetizing some videos as a welcome alternative to closing the whole…

> I don't blame the advertisers one bit from wanting to remove their ads from many videos. Once the media starts playing the game that "an ad on the video == the advertiser agrees with the message" I too would want to do everything I can to ensure that I'm not associated with bad things. Why do we do that on youtube when we don't do that on TV? Do we assume that if you're ad runs during you agree with the jokes in it…

Advertisers pull their ads to flex their muscles in the tv industry all the time.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#157

Post by pjc50 » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:20 PM UTC

Klathmon wrote: post #15

sqdbps wrote: post #2

The media’s part in this: For whatever reason they started scouring youtube for “controversial” videos checking if they had ads (no matter how little views they had) then they would contact the advertisers for comment. Advertisers would initiate damage control and pull their ads from youtube. Youtube would explain that the numbers and views in question are insignificant and that this type of complex system can never…

This is absolutely a "no-win" situation in my mind. Everyone is acting in their best interests, and in many cases are acting benevolently, but the outcome is still awful. Obviously YouTube is going to cave to advertiser pressure and start to restrict what videos can have ads, their whole existence depends on it, and if I worked at YouTube i'd see demonetizing some videos as a welcome alternative to closing the whole…

> Advertisers could push back on the notion that "an ad == approval"

Ads are far more than just "approval", they're funding. An ad appearing with a video is funding the production of more, similar videos.

It's quite meaningless to "boycott" a service that you're not paying money for, but people recognise that the modern flow of money around the economy is extremely indirect. This results in a lack of moral accountability. Campaigners aim to collapse the distance between those spending the money and the actual actions that result, to say "are you really happy paying for this to happen?"

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#158

Post by dwighttk » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:21 PM UTC

dec0dedab0de wrote: post #141

jacquesm wrote: post #82

'De-Monetized' suggests that someone who produces a video has an automatic right to income. That's bonkers, it's already quite a service that Youtube allows you to upload your videos to reach an audience that you'd be hard pressed to serve from your own server. They do this for free. In the previous iteration of such platforms all the ad income would go to the owner of the website, not to the rights owners of the vid…

'De-Monetized' suggests that someone who produces a video has an automatic right to income. That's bonkers, it's already quite a service that Youtube allows you to upload your videos to reach an audience that you'd be hard pressed to serve from your own server. They do this for free. In the previous iteration of such platforms all the ad income would go to the owner of the website, not to the rights owners of the vid…

>It's like when Apple pulls something from the AppStore because they want to release something similar.

when did that happen?

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#159

Post by maxerickson » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:21 PM UTC

bsenftner wrote: post #147

colechristensen wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Internet was supposed to be about the free exchange of information. People treat Facebook, Google, etc. etc. etc. as if they themselves are "The Internet" when they are publishers. "You" are not publishing content on YouTube, YouTube is publishing your content. Just because they do almost nothing to curate what they publish, doesn't mean the little they do is some civil rights violation. We're learning with the R…

"The Internet was supposed to be about the free exchange of information." Actually, no, not at all. The Internet was for defense contractors to share information, and when made available to the public it was for corporations to sell services to the public. All that "free information" propaganda was just propaganda to get the public comfortable with allowing large scale surveillance technologies into their homes and t…

My first access to the internet was through MichNet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merit_Network ) which was motivated by connecting individuals to the various academic resources available on the internet.

It preceded the commercialization of the internet.

Re: Suspect in YouTube Shooting Angry That Her Videos Had Been 'De-Monetized'

#160

Post by timkpaine » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 2:22 PM UTC

banned1 wrote: post #105

Simulacra wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very good analysis. You could apply that to just about anything in the news these days. What would you say are the worst organizations at manufacturing news?

CNN, MSNBC, mainly

that sweet, sweet koolaid