YouTube Demonetizing Gun Channels

[Mrs. Peel 7,157]

Interesting...this is just another new angle, I guess, for suppressing 2A activity. Article explains how YouTube is now automatically flagging gun sites - and how that loss of advertising for 7+ days impacts the companies' bottom lines.  Lots of gun sites from the NSSF to big gun brands are already impacted.

Despite forward movement in 2A rights in so many states in recent years, IMO, it has just forced opponents to get even craftier and more underhanded in their approaches. This is a case in point. Here's the link: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/08/robert-farago/breaking-youtube-demonetizing-gun-channels/ 

This will spawn and/or propel competing services is my prediction - some service other than YouTube, one with a true free speech philosophy, will start to grow by leaps and bounds. Normally, I'd be fine with that. But I also think this is part of a growing divide - where Americans put themselves in whichever echo chamber corresponds with their own values. Sad really. The Internet should be a free marketplace of ideas... not carved up into "safe spaces" where you only hear and see what doesn't "trigger" you. 

 

 

[oldguysrule649 397]

23 minutes ago, Mrs. Peel said:

Interesting...this is just another new angle, I guess, for suppressing 2A activity. Article explains how YouTube is now automatically flagging gun sites - and how that loss of advertising for 7+ days impacts the companies' bottom lines.  Lots of gun sites from the NSSF to big gun brands are already impacted.

Despite forward movement in 2A rights in so many states in recent years, IMO, it has just forced opponents to get even craftier and more underhanded in their approaches. This is a case in point. Here's the link: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2017/08/robert-farago/breaking-youtube-demonetizing-gun-channels/ 

This will spawn and/or propel competing services is my prediction - some service other than YouTube, one with a true free speech philosophy, will start to grow by leaps and bounds. Normally, I'd be fine with that. But I also think this is part of a growing divide - where Americans put themselves in whichever echo chamber corresponds with their own values. Sad really. The Internet should be a free marketplace of ideas... not carved up into "safe spaces" where you only hear and see what doesn't "trigger" you. 

 

 

Full30.com is one such site that gun channels have embraced as an alternative to Youtube.  Hickok45 among them.

[HBecwithFn7 296]

Apparently, it isn't just pro-2A channels.  There are others that are being demonetized. There's a guy that runs an Animal rescue in Valencia, Spain. They specialize in the rescue of some of the most ill-treated, sick & injured animals (mostly cats & dogs), get  them to a hospital in Valencia dedicated to restoring these animals, and then finding homes for them. They rescue animals from all around Europe. and Eurasia (Turkey, etc.). His YouTube channel is also being demonetized for some reason.  Maybe he upset the YouTube gods or fell afoul of them somehow, but...  

BTW, PM me if you want to know more about this animal rescue op. in Spain, and the owner's YouTube Channel.  But be warned.., while he has, lately, posted more "balanced"  videos (i.e. both "before" and "after" images of the animal), the "before" images are totally horrific. You'd never believe people could be so cruel to animals as to treat them like this.  And this guy does not pull any punches...  you see the animal exactly as it was found and brought into the hospital. But, lately, you also get to see the animal in various stages of recovery, up to and including a complete recovery and enjoying life at the home of their new adoptive family.

Fishnut, you might not want to view these videos. I swear, you'll be over there pronto with all your "inventory" ready to light up the scum who treat animals this way and keeps this guy's rescue effort in business. 

 

 

[mossburger 406]

A couple of the big Youtubers have been warning about this for years, notably Boogie2988 as far back as 2011. As a result, a lot of Youtube channels began "diversifying" their platform, by branching out to other social media, selling merchandise, mentioning sponsors or sponsored products in their videos, and taking direct monthly donations from sites like Patreon. These gun channels should have long ago begun doing the same, or should start now. 

At the end of the day, yes Youtube's policy is crap, but it's free enterprise. No one owes you a platform. Youtube is not a right, nor is it an employer where you have any rights or regulations. It's just a website. 

[HBecwithFn7 296]

Yup... The only way to teach YouTube a lesson is to hit'em where it hurts... in the pocketbook.

 

[124gr9mm 859]

16 hours ago, mossburger said:

A couple of the big Youtubers have been warning about this for years, notably Boogie2988 as far back as 2011. As a result, a lot of Youtube channels began "diversifying" their platform, by branching out to other social media, selling merchandise, mentioning sponsors or sponsored products in their videos, and taking direct monthly donations from sites like Patreon. These gun channels should have long ago begun doing the same, or should start now. 

At the end of the day, yes Youtube's policy is crap, but it's free enterprise. No one owes you a platform. Youtube is not a right, nor is it an employer where you have any rights or regulations. It's just a website. 

Yeah, while it seems crappy that they're focusing on gun sites, it's their prerogative to do so.

Facebook was doing something similar a few years ago which lead to several gun folks to diversify.  hickok45 has his videos on full30.com, youtube, and Facebook.  He's also sponsored by Federal ammo and Bud's Gun Shop, do the de-monitization probably didn't hurt him as bad as some others.


 

[mossburger 406]

31 minutes ago, 124gr9mm said:

Yeah, while it seems crappy that they're focusing on gun sites, it's their prerogative to do so.

They're actually not focusing on gun channels. It's a long story, but I'll try and make it short. 

Over the last few years, old media (TV, newspaper, radio, HBO etc.) has been losing massively to new media (social media, Youtube, Netflix). This caused sort of a "war" in the industry. 

One particular journalist from the Wall Street Journal decided to fire a shot, directly at the Youtuber with the highest subscriber count, Pewdiepie. He dug up a video where Pewdiepie made some Nazi jokes and another where he paid a guy $5 to hold up a sign saying Hitler Did Nothing Wrong as a (very distasteful) joke. He then followed up this salvo with some screenshots of hate videos for things like white supremacy or ISIS, next to ads for Pepsi and H&M; The reported alleged that Youtube was not doing enough to control where ads appear and thus is not a desirable place for advertisers.

It later turned out that this same reporter was in the process of trying to patent software related to controlling what content ads appear on. He was also likely just jealous big brands are advertising on Youtube instead of his dying paper. It also turned out some of his screenshots were fake, and that he had made the same sort of jokes about Jews and African-Americans on his Twitter. None of this matters because people only read headlines. 

Thus begins the "ad-pocalypse". Companies, fearing a PR nightmare of having their logo next to hate speech, as well as probably wanting to take any chance they can to pay less for advertisements, start pressuring Youtube to remove their ads.

The reality is that Youtube can't "smartly" filter for this. 300 hours of video are uploaded every minute. Yes you read that correctly. All they can do is make software, specifically "the algorithm" to try and control content. The design of this software is secretive for obvious reasons, it's like their 11 secret herbs and spices. 

Some people speculate, that it controls content based on machine-learning from several selected thumbnails from the video, snippets of audio content, keywords in the title and description, or a combination of all that. So it's wrapped a lot of channels up in getting demonetized. For example, it can conflate a video about not bullying LGBT teens with sexual content. It can stop a video about ending animal abuse because it contains animal abuse, etc. It makes no sense and they're likely working on it. But this is pretty cutting edge technology and I wouldn't expect a fix overnight.

[Kaiser 3]

They're actually not focusing on gun channels. It's a long story, but I'll try and make it short. 
Over the last few years, old media (TV, newspaper, radio, HBO etc.) has been losing massively to new media (social media, Youtube, Netflix). This caused sort of a "war" in the industry. 
One particular journalist from the Wall Street Journal decided to fire a shot, directly at the Youtuber with the highest subscriber count, Pewdiepie. He dug up a video where Pewdiepie made some Nazi jokes and another where he paid a guy $5 to hold up a sign saying Hitler Did Nothing Wrong as a (very distasteful) joke. He then followed up this salvo with some screenshots of hate videos for things like white supremacy or ISIS, next to ads for Pepsi and H&M; The reported alleged that Youtube was not doing enough to control where ads appear and thus is not a desirable place for advertisers.
It later turned out that this same reporter was in the process of trying to patent software related to controlling what content ads appear on. He was also likely just jealous big brands are advertising on Youtube instead of his dying paper. It also turned out some of his screenshots were fake, and that he had made the same sort of jokes about Jews and African-Americans on his Twitter. None of this matters because people only read headlines. 
Thus begins the "ad-pocalypse". Companies, fearing a PR nightmare of having their logo next to hate speech, as well as probably wanting to take any chance they can to pay less for advertisements, start pressuring Youtube to remove their ads.
The reality is that Youtube can't "smartly" filter for this. 300 hours of video are uploaded every minute. Yes you read that correctly. All they can do is make software, specifically "the algorithm" to try and control content. The design of this software is secretive for obvious reasons, it's like their 11 secret herbs and spices. 
Some people speculate, that it controls content based on machine-learning from several selected thumbnails from the video, snippets of audio content, keywords in the title and description, or a combination of all that. So it's wrapped a lot of channels up in getting demonetized. For example, it can conflate a video about not bullying LGBT teens with sexual content. It can stop a video about ending animal abuse because it contains animal abuse, etc. It makes no sense and they're likely working on it. But this is pretty cutting edge technology and I wouldn't expect a fix overnight.

The issue is that they still run ads on the videos, they're just not cutting the content creators in. Also, I've heard anecdotally that they are disproportionately going after more right-leaning personalities, or interests.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

[JohnRyan 12]

Revenue is also collected from end users through a subscription that removes the ads. 

Will creators still be paid with YouTube Red?

Yes, of course. In fact, YouTube Red provides a secondary revenue stream for creators in addition to what you're already earning today through ads.

ref: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6306276?hl=en

I'm not sure if "demonetized" channels still collect from subscription revenue.   

This tweet indicates they do:

Anyone able to confirm one this?