Thoughts on the adpocalypse 2020?

offbeatbryce said:
So lets say for example this situation. Miley Cyrus was known for good girl image for kids. Then went and danced sexually naked on a wrecking ball. etc I know tons of parents who still think she's okay for kids. In most instances I'd say she isn't but then she does lots for kids and sometimes will have family friendly content. If I make a video talking about Miley Cyrus or some other pop star what is that geared towards when one celebrity can be for kids one day and not the next?
Click to expand...

Like I have said multiple times, the people that are in real danger here are people who make Family-Friendly Content. Since the lines between kid's content and family-friendly content are extremely blurry, it is a very dangerous niche to be in right now. There is no clear answer on this at the moment. My best advice is to be extremely honest with yourself about the content. If you feel like it is has the potential to be very appealing to kids 13 and under, I would just mark it as for kids. If you feel that it has only a little appeal for children under 13, then it may be safe to mark it as not for kids, unless YT's systems says that it is for kids, then I would not argue with them.

My guess is that by the end of March 2020, we will have a lot clearer picture about which road to take. So again, my advice is to "Cover your butt" and wait out the storm.
 
Jungle Explorer said:
Like I have said multiple times, the people that are in real danger here are people who make Family-Friendly Content. Since the lines between kid's content and family-friendly content are extremely blurry, it is a very dangerous niche to be in right now. There is no clear answer on this at the moment. My best advice is to be extremely honest with yourself about the content. If you feel like it is has the potential to be very appealing to kids 13 and under, I would just mark it as for kids. If you feel that it has only a little appeal for children under 13, then it may be safe to mark it as not for kids, unless YT's systems says that it is for kids, then I would not argue with them.

My guess is that by the end of March 2020, we will have a lot clearer picture about which road to take. So again, my advice is to "Cover your butt" and wait out the storm.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately that seems to be the safest way. Although it's hard to believe that FTC will start to punish anyone at the beginning. I think they will try to force Youtube to track kids content and take down videos or whole channels that won't obey the rules. I'm talking about small channels that are in the "grey area". I guess biggest kids channels are already negotiating new terms within YouTube Kids.
 
Jungle Explorer said:
Absolutely! There are different forces at play here. There several content rating systems that have long governed what kind of content is suitable for what ages. Virtually all content everywhere is expected or required to adhere to these guidelines. Failing to do so, could land YT in court being sued by one of several child advocacies and watchdog groups. I don't care if you made a Telli Tubbies cartoon, if you cuss in it, it will be marked as non-children's content. The kicker here is that, the FTC may see this as an attempt to game the system, by producing content that is CLEARY targeted directly at kids, but trying to keep it on the main YT platform by saying cuss words in it in order to earn more money. I can guarantee that if they catch anyone doing this, they will be made an example of.

Like I said. Just be honest with your self and stop trying to find a loophole in the system. Listen to me, money for kid's content will come back. It is YT's cash cow, and they are not going to give it up. It will take a while, but the money will come back for kid's content. It is just the simple law of "Supply and Demand". YT can still put all the ads they want on kid's content, they just cannot be Targeted ads. But Contextual ads are no problem. Once the advertisers come to grips that they cannot use targeted ads, they will renegotiate for ads on kid's space for contextual ads.

Just sit back and cover your butt for the moment. Wait the storm out. Blues skies will come back.
Click to expand...
Dude, that's the deal, I'm not trying to find a loophole. I mean the ninja turtles from the comics literally impaled and killed shredder in their first issue. The new Batman crossover movie finally had the balls to show blood.

When I do a review I will not censor myself if I want to say "OMG THIS MOVIE WAS FUCKIN AWESOME", not will I not 'tip-toe' around people getting killed or whatever in the movie I'm talking about.

It's not a loophole, I'm just me being me, my content was never made with kids in mind. I don't want the FTC looking at ninja turtles, Batman, the marvel movies, video games and wrestling and call it a kids channel just because.
 
MarkRodriguez2012 said:
Dude, that's the deal, I'm not trying to find a loophole. I mean the ninja turtles from the comics literally impaled and killed shredder in their first issue. The new Batman crossover movie finally had the balls to show blood.

When I do a review I will not censor myself if I want to say "OMG THIS MOVIE WAS FUCKIN AWESOME", not will I not 'tip-toe' around people getting killed or whatever in the movie I'm talking about.

It's not a loophole, I'm just me being me, my content was never made with kids in mind. I don't want the FTC looking at ninja turtles, Batman, the marvel movies, video games and wrestling and call it a kids channel just because.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I did not mean you personally were trying to find a loophole. I was talking to people in general that might read this thread and be thinking this. I should have worded that differently.

Buddy, I really feel your pain. I am in the same boat. All of my content is definitely not targeted at kids, but is certainly very family-friendly, because I never cuss. You could play any one of my videos in front of a church on Sunday. I marked my whole channel as, "Not for kids". But if YT comes back and says certain videos are for kids, I am not going to argue with them.

I think the only real solution is to move all kids' content off of YT main, on to YT Kids. There are many that do not want this because deep in their hearts they want to keep making money off of crossover traffic (kids watching mature content), which is very selfish and it is putting everyone in the middle area, between adult content and kid's content, at risk.

Here is the thing that really worries me. YT does not want to separate the two platforms for the same reason. I know for a FACT that YT is STILL showing targeted ads on kid's content. Yesterday I was showing my friend the "I Love Eggs" video, which was a viral video back in the 1990s. Two ads appeared on the video. One ad was for Airborne Vitamins and the other was for a Programmable FOB key sold at Autozone Autoparts. I can guarantee you that both of those ads were targeted ads based upon my recent browsing behavior. The I Love Eggs song is as kid's content as it gets!

So what this shows is that YouTube is still showing target ads on kid's content. Why? Well, because they are still using tracking data to asses the age of the viewer. They assessed that my smartphone was being used by an adult because of my browsing behavior and showed me targeted ads. But here is the deal, this is the exact same thing they were doing before the lawsuit, that got them into trouble. Technically, there is no kid's account on YT main, because all account are over 13. So they are still tracking all the data and delivering ads to those accounts. COPPA does not prohibit the showing of ads. COPPA prohibits the TRACKING of data. YT is still tracking all data on all accounts and delivering ads based on that tracking data. Let that sink in for a little bit.

Bottom line is, YT is still up to its old game. They are still showing targeted ads on clear kid's content, which shows they are still tracking people who watch kids content. I caught them with their pants down. If I can do it, so can the FTC. Things may get a lot worse if they do not fly right.

 
Jungle Explorer said:
Like I have said multiple times, the people that are in real danger here are people who make Family-Friendly Content. Since the lines between kid's content and family-friendly content are extremely blurry, it is a very dangerous niche to be in right now. There is no clear answer on this at the moment. My best advice is to be extremely honest with yourself about the content. If you feel like it is has the potential to be very appealing to kids 13 and under, I would just mark it as for kids. If you feel that it has only a little appeal for children under 13, then it may be safe to mark it as not for kids, unless YT's systems says that it is for kids, then I would not argue with them.

My guess is that by the end of March 2020, we will have a lot clearer picture about which road to take. So again, my advice is to "Cover your butt" and wait out the storm.
Click to expand...

but how soon will the FTC start handing out fines? It can't be the minute we wake up on January 1st 2020 everyone is fined correct? I would assume my comedy video that mentions the word pervert isn't kid friendly .

Bryce
 
offbeatbryce said:
but how soon will the FTC start handing out fines? It can't be the minute we wake up on January 1st 2020 everyone is fined correct? I would assume my comedy video that mentions the word pervert isn't kid friendly .

Bryce
Click to expand...


Honestly, I think there are a lot of really big fish to fry first, like Ryans World, before they start getting to the smaller guys. By then, there will be a lot of court history, case law, and legal precedent that will change things radically. I believe this whole ruling of the FTC fining content creators will not stand up in court and will be overturned. But even if it does not, it will be clarified by each court case and ruling, giving creators a much clearer understanding. Ultimately, this boils down to a freedom of speech issue and I think the FTC is on the wrong side of the Constitution here. It may take years, but I think the Supreme Court will overturn this if it ever makes it in front of them.
 
Jungle Explorer said:
Honestly, I think there are a lot of really big fish to fry first, like Ryans World, before they start getting to the smaller guys. By then, there will be a lot of court history, case law, and legal precedent that will change things radically. I believe this whole ruling of the FTC fining content creators will not stand up in court and will be overturned. But even if it does not, it will be clarified by each court case and ruling, giving creators a much clearer understanding. Ultimately, this boils down to a freedom of speech issue and I think the FTC is on the wrong side of the Constitution here. It may take years, but I think the Supreme Court will overturn this if it ever makes it in front of them.
Click to expand...

I read that there were three other Child protection acts that were deemed unconstitutional and this one now probably is as well. At least I hope. I also feel like the courts don't have the time for this either. Imagine if 20,000 youtubers got fined sent to court etc all in the same day lol
 
Not sure if this true but I just read something that said if you don't have ads on your video you are fine regardless because the problem is ads geared towards kids when your video isn't for kids.
 
offbeatbryce said:
Not sure if this true but I just read something that said if you don't have ads on your video you are fine regardless because the problem is ads geared towards kids when your video isn't for kids.
Click to expand...

Yes. This is true. It is not necessarily the ads themselves, but that the ads reveal that the YT is tracking children. It is actually the tracking of children's data that is the crime, but the FTC does not have the access to Google's encrypted data banks to see the tracking data they have on kids, but they don't need the actual data, if they have evidence that it exist.

Say the cops find a person dead in their house and determine that they were murdered at around 8:00am. They ask a guy if he killed the person and the guy answers, "I was no where near here at 8:00am". Even though the Police don't have any physical evidence the guy did it, they know that he is the one that killed the person because he knew the time of death.

In the same manner, YT showing targeted ads to kids, conclusively shows that they are collecting tracking data on kids, which is a violation of COPPA.
 
so if I have no ads whatsoever I'm fine? What if I have no ads and set my videos to non kids? Some guy over on legal advice subreddit says that what they mean by kids it anywhere from 4 and up. that doesn't make since anyone under 13 can't use youtube correct or am I wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top