Have you kept uploading or just holding off until some light is shed?
Have not uploaded to this channel. The traffic hit from the removals is devastating, it has killed the channel.[DOUBLEPOST=1511857522,1511857045][/DOUBLEPOST]
Youtube has let this go on for far too long. Youtube has been contacted by decent family content creators for well over a year now and refused to take action. Even youtube reps would acknowledge on the phone the problem, but nothing was ever done. Now because Youtube ignored all of the creators that complained about the inappropriate content for well over a year, they have to go into panic mode and now everybody is getting hit. Now suddenly a child in a bathing suit is considered inappropriate. I do not feel the least bit sorry for some of these kid channels that could have resisted the trends, but instead went 100% into the dark for profit. Now that action is finally being taken, we will see if Youtube will get it right. I do however believe that print media is motivated by money and not strong morals in bringing this to light. Youtube needs to hurry up with new guidelines and actually enforce the guidelines going forward. The lack of transparency by Youtube is beyond ridiculous, but then again without them none of this would have been possible, so it is their world to run. Everyone is taking a big hit and unfortunately it is at a time where ads pay the best, but if that is the price to finally purge the inappropriate content then it is a price worth paying.
Yes and no.
On a video conf call with our Yt partner manager, a fellow creator asked what Yt's position is on Toy Freaks. Yt's statement was "we're letting the parents determine what's appropriate". Asked how to build traffic and what videos are best to make, the Yt rep stated to identify your most popular topics and video (Analytics - Groups) and compare the groups to each other to identify what your subscribers watch (highest watch time and retention), and make more. When she analyzed our channel, we together identified Doc mcStuffins Mommy Injection etc as the most popular videos with the highest engagement. I was advised to make more content like that. I have all this on screencapture video. It is only 1.5 weeks ago that Yt suddenly took this action and demonetized on mass. They had plenty of time to warn us, communicate to us, so we can adjust content. They never identified the "bad baby" trends as bad, not once on the 8 or so video conferences I've been on.
Anyways, we'll see how this pans out and legal avenues available.[DOUBLEPOST=1511857657][/DOUBLEPOST]
I work for a resume company.. I hope we don't start to pick up because of this![DOUBLEPOST=1511805651,1511805055][/DOUBLEPOST]The past three videos we have posted have stayed green.. like I mentioned before, I think toy reviews are back in. No more skits, nerf, grossness, just about nothing creative. Which youtube is supposed to be all about.
Ok that's great. Green is a nice color. Problem is, will kids watch? Maybe new kids coming onto the platform. Maybe have to think of away to make toy reviews fun.
We're bouncing some ideas around with a new channel as well, toys of course.[DOUBLEPOST=1511858002][/DOUBLEPOST]
I would even support youtube suspending ads for a six month period in the kids space and let the channels that produce content for more than just money come to the top.
And how do you propose these channels fund their living expenses for 2 parents and a few kids. By the most conservative, lower middle income estimates here in Australia, it costs $4000 all up for rent, expenses and a very basic standard of living (lower middle class). So for 6 months, that's $24,000. Add to that the costs of video production, toys, expendables, costs to drive and buy toys, etc, etc. At the very minimum, $1000/month to run a toy channel.
So you're proposing a family of 2 adults and 3 kids (like us), work for nothing, get in the hole by -$30,000 all the while producing content that draws viewers to the platform? So Youtube gets free content, viewership (which they can monetize in many ways), and we get what? A debt of $30,000?
Is that really the model you are proposing?[DOUBLEPOST=1511858295][/DOUBLEPOST]
I like this idea and in fact the creators themselves could be charged by taking an additional 1% of the revenue share to pay for review staff to ensure content is clean. A good example of what kids content should be is EvantubeHD. They set the bar high and then everyone else came in destroying the kids section. Youtube does have to take responsibility for letting this get out of hand. Many channels like babyteeth4 used to get a lot of views with good family friendly content. The algorithm killed them and because they were used to the money they turned to bad baby, creepy clowns, and inappropriate categories. A lot of channels rolled the dice in the name of money and boy are they paying the price now. Philip DeFranco did another good video on this issue today and included babyteeth4 as an example.
Youtube reps directly stated to follow trends. I have this on video. They wanted us to follow trends, they promoted the videos that were on trend, and the algorithm populated the right bar suggested with similar tagged on trend videos. The only reason
@babyteeth4 and us and others here and not on here jumped on bad baby is because that is what the algorithm promoted and what Yt reps encouraged us to do.[DOUBLEPOST=1511858601][/DOUBLEPOST]
Have not uploaded to this channel. The traffic hit from the removals is devastating, it has killed the channel.[DOUBLEPOST=1511857522,1511857045][/DOUBLEPOST]
Yes and no.
On a video conf call with our Yt partner manager, a fellow creator asked what Yt's position is on Toy Freaks. Yt's statement was "we're letting the parents determine what's appropriate". Asked how to build traffic and what videos are best to make, the Yt rep stated to identify your most popular topics and video (Analytics - Groups) and compare the groups to each other to identify what your subscribers watch (highest watch time and retention), and make more. When she analyzed our channel, we together identified Doc mcStuffins Mommy Injection etc as the most popular videos with the highest engagement. I was advised to make more content like that. I have all this on screencapture video. It is only 1.5 weeks ago that Yt suddenly took this action and demonetized on mass. They had plenty of time to warn us, communicate to us, so we can adjust content. They never identified the "bad baby" trends as bad, not once on the 8 or so video conferences I've been on.
Anyways, we'll see how this pans out and legal avenues available.[DOUBLEPOST=1511857657][/DOUBLEPOST]
Ok that's great. Green is a nice color. Problem is, will kids watch? Maybe new kids coming onto the platform. Maybe have to think of away to make toy reviews fun.
We're bouncing some ideas around with a new channel as well, toys of course.[DOUBLEPOST=1511858002][/DOUBLEPOST]
And how do you propose these channels fund their living expenses for 2 parents and a few kids. By the most conservative, lower middle income estimates here in Australia, it costs $4000 all up for rent, expenses and a very basic standard of living (lower middle class). So for 6 months, that's $24,000. Add to that the costs of video production, toys, expendables, costs to drive and buy toys, etc, etc. At the very minimum, $1000/month to run a toy channel.
So you're proposing a family of 2 adults and 3 kids (like us), work for nothing, get in the hole by -$30,000 all the while producing content that draws viewers to the platform? So Youtube gets free content, viewership (which they can monetize in many ways), and we get what? A debt of $30,000?
Is that really the model you are proposing?[DOUBLEPOST=1511858295][/DOUBLEPOST]
Youtube reps directly stated to follow trends. I have this on video. They wanted us to follow trends, they promoted the videos that were on trend, and the algorithm populated the right bar suggested with similar tagged on trend videos. The only reason
@babyteeth4 and us and others here and not on here jumped on bad baby is because that is what the algorithm promoted and what Yt reps encouraged us to do.
When will the corporation stop scapegoating it's contractor? Yt should take the fall for this, not creators. if they did not want bad baby, there was ample opportunity to email the TF dad, email any of us, tell us 'look guys, please don't make this content, we don't want it. I would be very happy to comply. Instead, rip out 2 years of hard work and f**k us over 3 weeks before Christmas, that's a better way.
I completely support deleting the spiderman joker sex peppa pig dentist garbage. Or just age gate it to 18+. Don't kill hard working families busting their arses off for years building a business and saving for their kids' future on a whim.
[DOUBLEPOST=1511859157][/DOUBLEPOST]
If you post a video, and it generates thousands of dollars a month in revenue, and YouTube doesn't say anything about that video for years, then that's a pretty clear signal from YT that you should make more of that content. It's not fair of them to come up later, after having implicitly approved a channel's video content for years, and delete that channel.
Exactly my point. All of us kids channels here, and probably the vast majority of kids channels, would gladly follow guidelines, as we are in this for the long haul and want to build a sustainable, enjoyable family business. But to promote videos to 5M or 10M views in a few days send a strong signal - this is viral, we like it, make more. Ads are running, advertisers are getting exposure, Yt is making money, creators are making money, viewers are enjoying it (and if they are not then bloody click off no one is forcing you to do anything in this world unless you live in Nazi Germany or North Korea). So everyone makes more of what the Yt algorithm promotes, and gets more views. And the algo promotes it even more to staggering levels. And the Yt rep during the calls says identify your best videos, playlists and groups, and make more.
That's like the sales department manager sitting you down, telling you you've had great sales with Hoover Model 455 vacuum cleaners in Orlando, and customers are buying more accessories as well, and tells you to sell more and more. Then 3 weeks before Christmas, you're fired for selling too many Hoover Model 455 vacuum cleaners and selling them too well. What the f**k? You told me to sell more???[DOUBLEPOST=1511859491][/DOUBLEPOST]
As for child labor thing, if you make multiple skits everyday with kids, that's abuse. But it really depends on degree of difficulty and frequency. Parents who want to play with kids creatively (skits) or just unboxing toys are far better than parents who are always away and/or letting children to watch YouTube all the time. Still I admit that as long as kids channels make bank there will be a question like this: are they having fun or using kids? Especially when the parents' job is making YouTube videos.
A skit can actually take 15 minutes to film. If you do 5-6 per week, that's say 2 hours. Maybe an hour in front of the green screen. The kids acting is very quick on the camera, well within the guidelines for child actors in Australia and I'm sure the US. All the extra 30 hours of work is with editing, special effects, sourcing footage and sounds, learning how to put it all together, matching sounds, editing.
Toy unboxing can take 3 hours for one video. Some toys, like the Barbie camper, take forever to open, do all the stickers, assemble, play, take many shots, etc. But then, the kids are playing anyways. There's just a camera also running. If the camera is off, they still play the same. Or what if it's a video for the family. Just because I have a camera running for 2 hours trained on the kids does not mean they are working, they are just playing and I'm recording. I can edit that to 2 min or 60 min, it doesn't matter. There's no laws to stop parents filming their kids playing, nor the parent interacting with their child while they are playing. Making money off stuff you created and own copyright to is not illegal either. Should monetization of videos determine if it's considered labor or play?
A family in rural Chiang Mai has 6 year olds planting rice in the muddy waters (I can see them from the back of our house). If the kids get paid 20 baht for their work, that's child labour by western standards. If they don't get paid but are doing it to help out the family who can't afford to pay Myanmar foreign workers to do it, is that still child labour?
Yt is a global company, by which country and standards will child labour be judged? Some of the things I've seen parents do in Thailand with their kids would land you in jail in Australia and the kids in foster care.
