Danger-Mouse Posted October 21, 2017 Report Share Posted October 21, 2017 In the morning before I go to work I always have a look on YT just to see what new videos have come out. The other day I did this and was very pleased to see that my favourite MMA commentator MixedMollyWhoppery had released a new video. He goes for quality over quantity so you can often wait weeks for anything new, but it's usually worth waiting for. His content is great and combined with his fantastic accent (a really thick maybe Brooklyn accent that sounds like he's in some kind of gangster movie) and unique turn of phrase that is liberally peppered with swearing and a great sense of humour he has produced some fantastic content. His new video starts with the news that many, if not all, of his videos have been demonitised because of the swearing in them and as such he will now have to bleep out the expletives. You could say that that's good in case kids watch them but his key demographic is aged 30+. He is rightfully unwilling to change his choice of phrase and so now to watch the uncensored videos viewers will have to subscribe to his Patreon channel. Then today I put on the latest Demolition Ranch video and the guy on that is now introducing the channel as Demonitisation Ranch and he explains that one of his early, very popular videos has been deleted from his channel and he has received a strike because of it. This video was 5 years old and at the time of publishing was within the rules of YT. So now we have YT issuing retroactive strikes. It seems that YT will drive away the content that doesn't fit it's world view by removing any financial bonus for those posting the videos. I understand that YT is a business but surely they could simply ask advertisers whether they wanted their product ads placed on adult content videos or not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
srspower Posted October 22, 2017 Report Share Posted October 22, 2017 (edited) It's not genuinely the advertisers, youtube are choosing who it allows to make certain content. For instance if a 'news' network covers a story about say terrorism then they are monitised. But if an independent journalist or commentator covers the exact same story they will get demonitised. South Park is on mainstream TV with advertising and if those guys themselves put clips etc on youtube they are monitised but if a normal person uses a clip from southpark they will be demonitised for swearing etc. So this is all a bit dodgy. I have had videos demonitised and age restricted so I appealed saying they do not contradict youtubes policies. They reply and say that whilst they don't contradict their policy they are demonitising it anyway. Google/youtube changed their algorithms to promote Hilary Clinton during the last US election as well. The thing is youtube doesn't actually make a profit it generally breaks about even it's value to google isn't what it appears to be. Edited October 22, 2017 by srspower Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.