[closed] YouTube's New "Advertiser-Friendly" Policy (all discussion goes here) **

Status
Not open for further replies.
Honestly right now this makes me feel a little less inclined to make the types of videos that I want to because I refuse to censor myself just because of these stupid rules. I feel like we've been running away from TV to youtube for these reasons and now youtube is becoming what we've ran away from. I hope these change.
 
Loki Doki said:
philip defranco uploaded this today



really interesting that youtube seems to be putting its foot down and making it so people can't monetize youtube videos. what do you guys think? just enforcing their own guidelines or trying to stop freedom of speech?
Click to expand...

Personally, it really won't affect me much. However, it does seem to be limiting some peoples freedom of speech which is really concerning. The reason people love YouTube is due to the fact that it's a no safe space zone where you can, or at least before this update, talk about anything you want. I understand many people have grown due to their vulgar language, but that's just another way to express yourself. I honestly don't see a problem with it as long as it's not hate aimed at someone else. But at the end of the day it's all about money. Money talks and it makes the world go round....
 
I dont think anyone's made a thread on this yet, so what are you guys' thoughts on this?

For anyone who doesn't know recently some large YouTubers have been hit with YouTube's new advertiser friendly policy, wherein to monetize content (or keep it monetised) it must fit within these new, very tight policies. Some of these include simply talking about sensitive issues such as rape, war, etc., swearing, sexual humour, and talking about anything controversial?

The new guidelines can be found under:
"Advertiser-friendly content guidelines" through a Google search for anyone interested.

It seems to be hitting certain YouTubers in particular, (e.g. phillip defranco, drama alert, etc), demonetising almost 50% of content, while at the same time leaving others, often with videos that really do conflict with YouTube's base terms of service, 100% unscathed (although this has just been implemented so we'll see). PhillipDeFranco actual tried getting in contact with youtube representatives, requesting an interview or statement for youtube to explain it's new policy, so far this has been declined.

Personally, I would like to see what has driven youtube to this extent. Have advertisers had a fit about what content they display on and started complaining about it? withdrawing their ads? Or has YouTube done this out of it's own agenda as a means of controlling what content gets published on the site? This has probably been one of YouTube's (ironically) most controversial moves, being a very blatant form of censorship that literally semi-prevents free speech on any topic youtube may deem controversial or not advertiser friendly.

What's everyones thoughts?
 
Last edited:
Honestly what YouTube could've done instead is make some sort of auto 'sensitive topic warning' (which would've still been a bad move imo) or something rather than demonetizing videos but I still find it stupid how they're not allowing sensitive topics to be discussed, people can easily exit the video if they're not interested.
 
LegitHuman said:
Honestly what YouTube could've done instead is make some sort of auto 'sensitive topic warning' (which would've still been a bad move imo) or something rather than demonetizing videos but I still find it stupid how they're not allowing sensitive topics to be discussed, people can easily exit the video if they're not interested.
Click to expand...
Right? I mean I could understand if it was more focused on making content that could be deemed controversial or in bad tastes, but simply talking about it? That's nuts if you ask me.
 
Rails2Revolution said:
Have advertisers had a fit about what content they display on and started complaining about it? withdrawing their ads? Or has YouTube done this out of it's own agenda as a means of controlling what content gets published on the site?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be surprised if it was a way to suppress some "unpopular" opinions on controversial topics, either from the advertisers' side or Youtube's side (I'd say advertisers because Youtube might outright block the videos for violations of ToS).
As far as my channel goes I shouldn't have issues because I don't tackle sensible topics, but I wouldn't be surprised in the future, may it be a bunch of years or a dozen, to see channels banned for "crimethinking", allow me the quote.
 
Seems like a bit of a shakeup, scare everyone about losing monetization, get them to clean their act up to YouTubes "new standards".

This does effect me though so I'll have to see what happens
 
Reporting in as an education channel- a few of my history videos have been demonetized.
One was about the history of the Marshall Islands and US Nuclear testing there.
One was about the American Civil War.
The last video was a history of Islam.

Apparently, education = not advertiser friendly
Great job YouTube. You have the right, but damn is this stupid.

Edit: Looked into it. Spanish election video is good to go. Appealing the others.
 
Last edited:
I have the feeling that the days of making a living on YouTube are pretty much over. It's a platform that made a lot of money for very few people, and now it's glutted and YouTube can't show advertisers the benefit of putting ads on everything and anything, so they're trying to tighten up.

Making a living on YouTube through ad revenue is probably going to be out of reach for most (it already is, I believe). Now, using the platform as a way of showing your work to others may be a good strategy still, but there are other platforms that have caught up and indeed can get you more views in a much shorter time (whenever I upload a video to Facebook, I get about 10X the views, because it's more easily shared), so it's a matter of what strategy works for you.
 
Rails2Revolution said:
while at the same time leaving others, often with videos that really do conflict with YouTube's base terms of service, 100% unscathed (although this has just been implemented so we'll see).
Click to expand...
About this statement. Its probably just a matter of time. How when they review stuff takes time. People forget how many channels and videos are out there and no one really knows how much the process of demonetising can happen in a period of time.

Even some of mine has had the monetisation enabled, disabled, reviewed, enabled, disabled again, enabled back in the duration of 10 months or so ago. Just because I was talking about nuclear fallout and murderers. There's still a chance of their videos getting monetised back after a review, but I guess the bigger channels never got their videos demonetised ever before no matter what the ToS says?

They probably added this new rule coz of all the "drama" everyone is doing. Since everyone is saying something along the lines of "make YouTube great again", they probably just want youtube to have less drama and more of a creative outlet for people in the long run.

Also, legit question. Does this mean when less videos gets monetised, higher ad revenue to those that CAN get their videos monetised? Something about ad placement bidding?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top