Youtube Institutes Monetization Changes - ....Really?

So earlier today, Youtube rolled out changes to its monetization setup:

Reading these, you can immediately see that they're ambiguous enough to allow widespread demonetization of virtually everything and then some. But a recent vid by Phillip DeFranco, and reports by several other YouTubers has revealed a pattern in the channels getting demonetized:

I'm hoping to Christ that this pattern isn't as insane as it seems at a glance, because fuck, man.

 

[AnOminous]

People don't seem to get that if you aren't paying to use a service, you are not the customer. You are the product. The customer is the one who's paying. In this case, that's the advertisers. If the advertisers are paying to have their ads on some content, and they say "But I don't want those janky ones over there," YouTube is going to do that shit. In fact, they're going to take active measures to keep those guys happy.

Even if, by some stretch of the concept of free speech, you had a right to rant and rave on YouTube about goobergrape or how much you hate Jews/white people/SJWs/whatever, you absolutely have zero right actually to be paid for it. The government is not going to step in in some weird intervention and tell Mr. Advertiser Guy that he has to pay to have his ads on your shitty, nutty rant videos.

 

[The Lawgiver]

People don't seem to get that if you aren't paying to use a service, you are not the customer. You are the product. The customer is the one who's paying. In this case, that's the advertisers. If the advertisers are paying to have their ads on some content, and they say "But I don't want those janky ones over there," YouTube is going to do that shit. In fact, they're going to take active measures to keep those guys happy.

Even if, by some stretch of the concept of free speech, you had a right to rant and rave on YouTube about goobergrape or how much you hate Jews/white people/SJWs/whatever, you absolutely have zero right actually to be paid for it. The government is not going to step in in some weird intervention and tell Mr. Advertiser Guy that he has to pay to have his ads on your shitty, nutty rant videos.

That would make sense if not for the fact Youtube is trying to become a fucking subscription service like netflix and hulu and keeps shoving Youtube red ads on non-monetized videos.

 

[AnOminous]

That would make sense if not for the fact Youtube is trying to become a fucking subscription service like netflix and hulu and keeps shoving Youtube red ads on non-monetized videos.

If they get shitty enough they'll be replaced. They're apparently nowhere near that shitty yet.

 

[CatParty]

If they get shitty enough they'll be replaced. They're apparently nowhere near that shitty yet.

Just wait till its full on over the top. Red is just the beginning.

 

[Brandobaris]

Even if, by some stretch of the concept of free speech, you had a right to rant and rave on YouTube about goobergrape or how much you hate Jews/white people/SJWs/whatever, you absolutely have zero right actually to be paid for it. The government is not going to step in in some weird intervention and tell Mr. Advertiser Guy that he has to pay to have his ads on your shitty, nutty rant videos.

That is a bit of a strawman isn't it? I mean consider online 3rd party news/politics channels. If they lose monetization for talking about "sensitive topics", then CNN/BBC/NBC etc become the only game in town. Who benefits the most from this? Not the advertisers, because now there are fewer channel to advertise on, viewership may leave, as they came to Youtube for a independent reporting of the news. And not the "There are WMD's in Iraq" news stories.

 

[KingGeedorah]

People should get real jobs like ditch digging and bridge pylon setting instead of filming themselves and posting that shit on Youtube for monetary gain.

I've used Ad-Block as long as I've know it exists and everyone else should be.

You can donate to Patreon if you want to support a Youtube personality.

 

[lolwut]

It works perfectly as a simulation of Democracy, except nothing that happens in Democracy in the real world happens in-game.

So then it's not. At all.

 

[Sam Sung]

Can't they just purge this site altogether and demonetize everything? That way some of the whiners could get out finding real jobs?

 

[AnOminous]

That is a bit of a strawman isn't it? I mean consider online 3rd party news/politics channels. If they lose monetization for talking about "sensitive topics", then CNN/BBC/NBC etc become the only game in town. Who benefits the most from this? Not the advertisers, because now there are fewer channel to advertise on, viewership may leave, as they came to Youtube for a independent reporting of the news. And not the "There are WMD's in Iraq" news stories.

So how do you propose the government force people to buy ads they don't want on channels they don't want to?

 

[Jaiman]

Google staff made a response to the controversy earlier:

https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!topic/youtube/djWE1FRqQKo
https://archive.is/EZVy7

 

[Brandobaris]

So how do you propose the government force people to buy ads they don't want on channels they don't want to?

Well CNN and the such appear to be exempt from the "Advertiser Friendly Content Guidelines" on YouTube. As are all the major press outlets and media corporations. If a small independently operated youtube channel decided to use that exact same footage CNN used for its news report, and then do its own news report, it's now liable to be flagged by a bot under the YT guidelines, for talking about sensitive and controversial topics. Now, do the content producers receive in escrow ad revenue for the time the video is under review? Or do they receive nothing until the video is then approved and 500,000 people have already seen it? I'd say no. The bot has flagged the video and therefore advertisers won't touch it. So no money is being brought in.

Bit of a double standard isn't it?

 

[CatParty]

here is maddox being the voice of reason. just don't try to monetize your videos

 

[XYZpdq]

If these insights were _so_ astonishing you could hustle up your own sponsors and run your own ad in it yourself like "Hey guys this new movie is THE WORST SHIT EVER! This is brought to you by Tasty Cake! They're Tasty! AND BULGEMAN'S TIGHTS ARE THE WRONG SHADE OF MAUVE AHHHHHHHHHHHHH!"

 

[BatNapalm]

I wonder if this will eventually lead to more sites in a similar vein to FunnyOrDie or with things going back to how they were in the pre-YouTube days with creators putting their content on their own site and not relying one giant video-sharing website.

 

[AnOminous]

here is maddox being the voice of reason. just don't try to monetize your videos

View attachment 130948

No shit. Seriously, it's entirely possible for anyone who wants to monetize pretty much any Internet content to a) register your own fucking domain; b) set up your own fucking server; c) stream whatever you want; d) put a bunch of "pay me" buttons on it. You don't need YouTube. YouTube pays you a pittance and you'd probably get a pittance over and above what you paid for your hosting, but it would all be yours and you could depend on it.

That is if you have anything people would actually go out of their way to click on.

There are all kinds of subscription sites. They do what they want.

These people are whining that they don't get to do what they want AND get paid for it on someone else's site.

Bit of a double standard isn't it?

So? They could have a triple standard or a quadruple standard or refuse to even allow Democrats, or Republicans, or circus clowns, on the site at all, if they felt like it.

 

[CatParty]

S A L T Y

 

[AnOminous]

S A L T Y

Note, all these autists are complaining about free speech on YouTube. . .on YouTube.

You show 'em, protesters!

 

[Brandobaris]

So? They could have a triple standard or a quadruple standard or refuse to even allow Democrats, or Republicans, or circus clowns, on the site at all, if they felt like it.

Yeah sure, doesn't mean people aren't gonna be pissed. It's easy to go say, go make a channel on another website if you don't like it. Go make your own youtube. So who's gonna come with you? Why should anyone go there? They don't give a shit about the adsense stuff, they only care about watching cool vids, all the cool vids are on youtube. You think PewDiePie, DeFranco, and FineBros are gonna take half the YT viewership with them or something?

It's not 2006 anymore, its not "there are no girls on the internet" "guys sitting in a forum talking about dnd alignments. Youtube, Facebook, Reddit, you are not on the big 3, you are nobody.

 

[AnOminous]

It's not 2006 anymore, its not "there are no girls on the internet" "guys sitting in a forum talking about dnd alignments. Youtube, Facebook, Reddit, you are not on the big 3, you are nobody.

Consider me glad to be nobody then.

 

[GV 998]

I frankly don't care. in fact, I am enjoying all the delicious salt from this. Especially from Let's Players.

Because honestly, I don't believe you should be able to make a career out of just filming yourself playing video games