Youtube to delete content December 10, 2019
 

https://straightlinelogic.com/2019/11/16/youtube-is-planning-to-delete-all-accounts-that-arent-commercially-viable-starting-december-10-by-ethan-huff/

In the “Account Suspension & Termination” section of YouTube’s “Terminations by YouTube for Service Changes,” guidelines, the company explains that, as of December 10, 2019, “YouTube may terminate your access, or your Google account’s access to all or part of the Service, if YouTube believes, in its sole discretion, that provision of the Service to you is no longer commercially viable.”

In other words, if you have a YouTube channel that YouTube employees decide isn’t profitable enough for Google, then the company has now granted itself the option to completely shut down your account without warning or consequence.

Interesting question here: At what point, if ever, does a privately-owned enterprise become deeply enough ingrained in society that it should morph into something publicly controlled? At one end of the spectrum, we'd argue youtube can set whatever terms it wants to its service. At the other, we'd argue that youtube has become so ubiquitous in the business models of so many that they have detrimentally relied on youtube forever showing their content. It has become, in effect, like a utility, subject to regulatory oversight.

Complex question.

Look at how the telephone companies, shipping companies (common carriers), utilities, etc. have been dealt with over time.

Monopolies get broken up. Distribution channels are split from content/goods. Discrimination against content/goods is barred, except when it is physically unsafe.

Like anyone else with a Youtube channel, I was recently required to certify whether or not my content was "child friendly" (or whatever term it was they used). I found that kind of odd, but fine, whatever - it's their service. All I have on there are a bunch of old track videos and backroads driving/riding videos. It would make no difference to me if they were gone tomorrow. I bet they will be, since none are "monetized" in any way. Oh well.

I can't wait to see how politicized this all gets. Youtube has already suffered countless accusations of manipulating content with certain political motivations driving their decisions. My reaction has always been as ambivalent as it would be to seeing them delete my content - so what? It's their service. They should be able to do whatever the hell they want. Let viewers decide if it is worth their time to tune in.

That's my "free market", or "individual responsibility", or "freedom of choice" take on it. Terry, however, with a much more professional, legal viewpoint of such matters, does raise some very interesting points. I'm quite sure the fight will evolve along the lines he suggests. Likely with political underpinnings... should be interesting...

The problem I have with youtube is that they initially let ANY content on their platform without moderation. They worked very hard to attract videos from all over the place. Then the second they were the dominant platform, they started banning, shadow banning, demonetizing, and deleting content they didn't agree with--often content they actively courted a few years earlier.

It seems their master plan was to draw everyone into their platform then, once there were no viable alternatives, destroy any content they did not agree with.

That would be typical Google behavior.

Put yourself in their position for a minute, though. Youtube, worried about negative repercussions of certain content--let's say it's some Charles Manson type figure urging teenagers to commit suicide--pulls it. Just like that, they jump into the wonderful world of content moderation. They'll take a beating from whomever they censor, but that's hardly the biggest concern. The big swinger is the cost to the company and attendant liability of reviewing literally billions of uploads from all over the world. At present, this is a task largely being done by humans (AI is not advanced enough), and the burnout rate is incredible. Imagine spending your day screening videos of all the horrible things folks can dream up doing. Here is a 2017 article where youtube claimed it would be hiring 10,000 reviewers in 2018. Not sure if they did, but that's a gigantic expense and a swan dive into an ever increasing morass of cost and potential liability.

Eliminate content that doesn't jibe with their agenda ?....never ! LOL !

Not only that the cost and potential liability will be like a muddy swamp.

Many of the peeps who made "Help me with this noise" or "Look how I fixed this" videos will be bottom sliced.

Here's an article about what the content reviewers' lives are like. Weird job.

I like to toss this issue to my undergrads to wrestle with. Their perspective on online society is different from that of older folks.

I would expect they would likely only do this to highly viewed content from users with massive followings but make "objectionable content".

Your track videos are probably safe.

Interesting how the cited article makes it sound like it's a pogrom on conservatives.

And if you're making your living on YouTube, you need to start thinking about getting a real job.

I do hope so. I would kind of defeat one of the original attractions to YouTube.

Another interesting site: a list of all the projects google has killed - https://killedbygoogle.com

I personally have a vimeo account, but not a youtube account.

Some of the big players that youtube might close down are smart intelligent people that figured out how to connect with a large base. That base will look them up wherever they go.

From a business perspective, youtube should be in it to make a profit. This policy helps promote that. That said, they may lose customers that don't like youtube moving from open content, to opinion approved content.

Let's say YouTube pulls all the helpful, but uncommercialized content from their site. Doesn't that mean there's an open opportunity for another rival service to host those? Maybe this is just a case of clearing the dead wood - all the accounts that haven't been used in five years.

Notice it says "may".

Youtube is simply giving themselves options.

There are people on youtube making millions a month. About as real as a lot of the jobs out there.

From a Google employee:

To clarify, this section is not about terminating an account because it’s not making money. It’s about discontinuing certain YouTube features or parts of the service, for example, removing outdated/low usage features. This does not impact creators or viewers in any new ways.

But think of all the millennials, and their "careers"...

:D

Lotta folks are gonna have to change their majors too :)

Thanks for clarifying. I remember when Google had a motto of 'Do No Evil".

However, Google/YouTube has been censoring content for quite sometime now and mostly for political leaning reasons and not because the content was against their guidelines. The platform has an agenda to follow. I do not wish for a North Korean Style Online Platforms. Freedom of speech, which we enjoy here thank you, is the cornerstone of our political system and once arbitrary rules decide whose voice will be heard than dissent is censored forever.

And that is entirely my fault...for what was to be just a PSA.

I grabbed a nearest convenient articular to describe the potential ramifications to many small creators/customers/viewers.

That does not leave out anything else, though.

What about all the youtubers who embrace "#VanLife" ? Are they going to have to sell the van, and work in a factory ?

If it is information coming out of Google, I have no doubt it is self serving.

In other news, water is wet - film at 11!

News flash: companies act in their own interests!

I was just watching some documentaries about Planned Parenthood.
(probably the ones which cost the director a $800k court judgement)

Youtube let me watch the first two episodes(baby parts and all).

Then on the third...
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1574183267.png

1. Now that they've achieved majority market-share and dependency, I'm wondering if YT will become 'sign-in only' so they can track and sell individual viewer ad profiles like Facebook does?
When combined with Android, Nest, and other interlinked products, the company's ability to control and steer a person's complete online experience throughout the day would be complete. From start to finish.

It would be like 1995 AOL's own portal to the AOL Guided Web Experience(tm) all over again.
They provide everything and block what 'you are not supposed to see'.

2. Or will YT become 'subscription only' for full monetization?
That might create an outgoing flood.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1574183598.png

Also dubious about the veracity of it, so what is the point of quoting Google about anything regarding Google.

It is known they lie about censoring content, among other things.

Seems like the market is ripe for a youtube alternative.

Many of these new-fangled careers earn more money in a month than most people here made in an entire lifetime.

I'm switching over to metube...

Moot point. You pretty much have to be a clueless hermit today to not have a Google account.
Google Docs, Google Drive, Google Keep, Google Groups, Google News, Google Maps, Google Gmail, Google Calendar, Google YouTube, etc.
Full integration across all devices, and with your mobile phone.
Literally thousands of dollars of software in exchange for a few (blocked) ads. LOL.

I’d like to see a crack down on “influencers.”

"Influencers" are the Pied Pipers for the lonely eager eyeballs waiting for that next twitch.
Easy advertisement prey there.

Those shouldn't fall under the stated monetary goals, unless something else is involved.

Cripes. Ten years ago I watched a vid on Charles Whitman and the Austin clocktower killings. It included info on Whitman getting killed and the second cop had a shotgun. I immediately started receiving ads on Rhino shotgun shells. I mean pop-ups on subsequent YouTube vids.

Not sure what "a few (blocked) ads" means.............but we are owned. Edit: I can still watch my Neil Degrass Tyson and Kubrick vids.

Assimilation ain't that bad.

The third was age restricted. I bet someone(s) complained about this or that.

Terms of service change - I see that daily.

Those instances are extremely rare. According to several sources, YouTube content makers earn anywhere between $3 and $10 per 1K views, although that can be higher or lower in some cases. The average salary of a YouTuber with a million subscribers is around $57K per year.

It's actually an interesting dynamic. Youtubers who are good/funny/have hot-chicks-working-on-cars-in-shorts tend to get a lot of eyeballs. Tyler Hoover, who does Hoovie's Garage, is an example of an entertaining guy who has a lot of views and has a lot of subscribers. I don't know how well he's doing financially from it (he's also a writer for Autotrader), but he gets a lot of ad content delivered to me. I'll bet he generates a lot of revenue for google, but doesn't get paid what he is worth. He could bail, but his income stream would evaporate. So he takes what they are willing to give him. It is, after all, their sandbox he's playing in.

I think we should check with Wesley Mouch, he is generally right about these matters.