Confirmed by Manual Review Wrongfully

[Michael]

Does anyone still get this when your video is perfectly fine and no different to the rest of the content you usually make with nothing specific standing out as to why it would be manually confirmed as not suitable?

A while back I did some testing which showed that even during uploading (before the processing stage) the system could confirm a video "by manual review", I had so many confirmed this way. What I do now is wait until the video has uploaded, ensure no other videos are still awaiting a review and then once finished editing the title, tags etc I will then submit a request for manual review. I was getting every video approved manually up until today when it was "confirmed" within a few minutes of uploading.

It is hard to believe people are actually watching these unless they are tired underpaid workers with their eyes bleeding all day watching video content clicking yes or no leading to many of them not caring what they choose.

What are your thoughts on this? Have you had problems with the "manual" review system?

 

[UKHypnotist]

Michael,

First of all, it's great to see the founder of this forum actively posting again.

Two questions for you. Is this a "suitable for all advertisers" review? If not, what type of review is it? The manual monetization suitability review is only open for videos which receive 1000 or more views per week; so I don't see how a video just being uploaded could be open for manual review in the first place.

 

[Michael]

Michael,

First of all, it's great to see the founder of this forum actively posting again.

Two questions for you. Is this a "suitable for all advertisers" review? If not, what type of review is it? The manual monetization suitability review is only open for videos which receive 1000 or more views per week; so I don't see how a video just being uploaded could be open for manual review in the first place.

It is good to see some members I recognise still posting

Yeah that is right, this is the review where you request a manual one, to find out if it is suitable for all advertisers or not. I have been getting videos approved manually and confirmed as not suitable manually with well under 1000 views on the video, the videos typically have around 200 views before they are "reviewed".

The past few days they have been going through fine and getting approved manually again, the other day may have been a half asleep reviewer clicking away

 

[UKHypnotist]

It is good to see some members I recognise still posting

Yeah that is right, this is the review where you request a manual one, to find out if it is suitable for all advertisers or not. I have been getting videos approved manually and confirmed as not suitable manually with well under 1000 views on the video, the videos typically have around 200 views before they are "reviewed".

The past few days they have been going through fine and getting approved manually again, the other day may have been a half asleep reviewer clicking away

Perhaps you're right about the half-asleep reviewer at that. Hope things keep going well for you!

 

[Michael]

Perhaps you're right about the half-asleep reviewer at that. Hope things keep going well for you!

Thank you, I keep getting them "confirmed by manual review" just moments after uploading and releasing and then similar content after that I release is apparently reviewed as perfectly fine, I wonder if its my accent and the AI cannot understand it and assumes I swear or something, whatever it is YouTube is definitely broken when it comes to these "reviews".

I wonder if its done at random now that Mars have pulled out all ads.

 

[vatiwah]

Does anyone still get this when your video is perfectly fine and no different to the rest of the content you usually make with nothing specific standing out as to why it would be manually confirmed as not suitable?

A while back I did some testing which showed that even during uploading (before the processing stage) the system could confirm a video "by manual review", I had so many confirmed this way. What I do now is wait until the video has uploaded, ensure no other videos are still awaiting a review and then once finished editing the title, tags etc I will then submit a request for manual review. I was getting every video approved manually up until today when it was "confirmed" within a few minutes of uploading.

It is hard to believe people are actually watching these unless they are tired underpaid workers with their eyes bleeding all day watching video content clicking yes or no leading to many of them not caring what they choose.

What are your thoughts on this? Have you had problems with the "manual" review system?

Youtube's manual review standards is inconsistent and frustrating. I do videos where I showcase 5-8 mods for a game. Usually these mods are for changing how trees look, adding a new NPC into the game, giving you more hair options and etc. Usually there is also an outfit mod that is included. The outfits may or may not be skimpy, but if it is skimpy, it is pretty much what you would see if you go to the beach in Santa Monica or Long Beach. The videos are usually 12 minutes long and i show the mods at different parts of the video.

But anyways, I am very annoyed with the manual review system because I am not sure what they perceive as ad friendly. I uploaded a video that had a christmas lingerie outfit. Kind of like a sexy Mrs. Clause. I even asked viewers which part of the body it enhances the most? Butt or Bust. Guess what? Manual review remonetized my video lol. And then, I uploaded a similar video, but this time it had a more conservative outfit (covers up more) and I didn't really make as many crude jokes. But for some reason, manual review confirmed it was not ad friendly. I reuploaded it to try again, but it was still confirmed by manual review. Keep in mind, these videos were private, had no tags, description, titles (aside from safe file name) and I didn't even upload a thumbnail. I am wondering why the first video got approved and the other one did not. You may or may not like what I described in my videos, but I have been doing it for many years and let's focus on the manual review. I know my videos are raunchy, but i tend to not break the community guidelines (except for maybe a handful to get aged restricted and i know that there are separate guidelines for ads). Don't get me started on age-restriction lol, I remember them telling me that I broke no community guidelines but they FEEL its not okay to be shown to general public.

INTERESTINGLY enough, I had another video that was demonetized and confirmed by manual review. I reuploaded it again a day later and strangely, it was not demonetized (even after waiting a few hours). There wasn't a problem.

Now.. I really really want to know what is acceptable or not and it does not help when it is not consistent. I would definitely follow their new rules if I knew exactly what they were. The rules are rather vague and too broad. I guess one video was reviewed by a chill person and the other video was reviewed by some prude or sensitive person.

 

[UKHypnotist]

@vatiwah

I know why you are getting the confirmed by manual review. YouTube considers game mods, especially unofficial mods not authorized by the game devs, in the same light as they do software hacks, cracks, and game cheat methods not authorized by game devs. The fact that some of these involved sexy dressing and your asking about bust or butt enhancement doesn't help your cause either.

You'd be well advised to change your content type; both if you wish for successful monetization, and also channel survival. Community Guidelines strikes, just like Copyright strikes are under the "three and your channel is terminated" rule. You haven't gotten any yet; but the way YouTube seems to be going now, it could happen to you at any time; and advertisers simply don't like their ads being shown on content linked to possible dishonesty.

 

[vatiwah]

@vatiwah

I know why you are getting the confirmed by manual review. YouTube considers game mods, especially unofficial mods not authorized by the game devs, in the same light as they do software hacks, cracks, and game cheat methods not authorized by game devs. The fact that some of these involved sexy dressing and your asking about bust or butt enhancement doesn't help your cause either.

You'd be well advised to change your content type; both if you wish for successful monetization, and also channel survival. Community Guidelines strikes, just like Copyright strikes are under the "three and your channel is terminated" rule. You haven't gotten any yet; but the way YouTube seems to be going now, it could happen to you at any time; and advertisers simply don't like their ads being shown on content linked to possible dishonesty.

Nope. Game mods for Skyrim and Fallout is authorized by Bethesda (who developed those games). It is not a hack or anything like that and it is for single player game. Hell, the upcoming Fallout 76, the chief developer and CEO of bethesda say modding and third party modding is coming soon for that game.

IUKHynpnotist, I uploaded 9 videos of similar content to test out the manual review process. All 9 got demonetized so I deleted the videos. Reuploaded all 9 videos, 8 was demonetized, 1 was appealed through manual review. I deleted and reuploaded the 8 that was demonetized, all 8 was still demonetized, so I submitted them for manual review. 3 got appealed while 5 was confirmed. Deleted the 5, reuploaded the 5... I asked for manual confirmation for the 5 demonetized videos. this time, 4 got appealed.

It took me like 4 attempts (which took me 4 days since it takes them a day to review) to get almost all 9 videos through, which had no tags, description and etc.

If they change the rules and guidelines, they should at the very least make videos done before those changes be excluded. I can make exclusively kitten videos right now and a year from now they might say kitten videos are bad and bannable.

 

[UKHypnotist]

Nope. Game mods for Skyrim and Fallout is authorized by Bethesda (who developed those games). It is not a hack or anything like that and it is for single player game. Hell, the upcoming Fallout 76, the chief developer and CEO of bethesda say modding and third party modding is coming soon for that game.

IUKHynpnotist, I uploaded 9 videos of similar content to test out the manual review process. All 9 got demonetized so I deleted the videos. Reuploaded all 9 videos, 8 was demonetized, 1 was appealed through manual review. I deleted and reuploaded the 8 that was demonetized, all 8 was still demonetized, so I submitted them for manual review. 3 got appealed while 5 was confirmed. Deleted the 5, reuploaded the 5... I asked for manual confirmation for the 5 demonetized videos. this time, 4 got appealed.

It took me like 4 attempts (which took me 4 days since it takes them a day to review) to get almost all 9 videos through, which had no tags, description and etc.

If they change the rules and guidelines, they should at the very least make videos done before those changes be excluded. I can make exclusively kitten videos right now and a year from now they might say kitten videos are bad and bannable.

Yes they might indeed do something like that; and no, YouTube doesn't "grandfather" video content when the rules change. It didn't grandfather channels who didn't have the required subs and watch time hours the new rules required simply because they were created before those rules existed; did they?

Remember Bethseda and YouTube are totally different entities, with totally different content rules. It's my belief, (and I am willing to check on this in the morning and amend my post with what I find; It's nearly 3 AM where I am) that YouTube just doesn't like game mods in general; and places such content into the "limited or no ads" category by default.

 

[vatiwah]

Remember Bethseda and YouTube are totally different entities, with totally different content rules. It's my belief, (and I am willing to check on this in the morning and amend my post with what I find; It's nearly 3 AM where I am) that YouTube just doesn't like game mods in general; and places such content into the "limited or no ads" category by default.

It would be nice for youtube to provide a list of the tags/keywords that are seen as not ad friendly so we can avoid making content relating to those words. Hell, last week, that Susan whats her face, the CEO of youtube, made a video saying they are dedicated to transparency and a few other buzzwords.

Based on what you are saying, they put my videos into the no ad category by default because my video title/file name does have the word "mod" in it. But then they end up approving it (after a few attempts of manual review). If modding is wrong, then surely they would have upheld the demonetization. It is just a big confusion and mess. Hell, if it was confirmed, it wouldn't hurt them to put a reason why it was not confirmed. Even if it was one word comment like "violent" "drugs" "sex" "racism". Yeah, there are ad guidelines, but we all know those guidelines are broad and left open to interpretation. Yeah, sexy stuff is frown upon in today's youtube, but what constitutes as too sexy? A fat guy with his shirt off? A handsome guy with his shirt off? A woman walking on the beach in a bikini? A woman in a red dress doing a come hither hand motion? Looking at the detailing of the bra top of an outfit?

*edit* You know what? I'm going to upload the last video that still is not approved. But I am going to change the file name/title so it does not include the word mod in it. If it works, I could kiss you... but I have to use the word mod so people can find the video haha.