YouTube sets 'advertiser friendly' requirements for monetisation...

[cheat_master30]

Unfortunately for them, these rules are absolutely insane for a site like theirs. I mean, look at them:

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6162278?hl=en-GB

For example, this one is nuts:

Inappropriate language, including harassment, swearing and vulgar language

Why? Well, look at it this way. How many big YouTube channels have tons of swearing?

Oh wait, pretty much every caustic critic one on the site. This is basically saying Angry Video Game Nerd, Channel Awesome, the Yogscast, Angry Show and Pewdiepie can't monetise their videos.

That's basically saying their biggest channel ever (47 million subscribers) might not to be able to make money on YouTube. The other channels mentioned have 678,000 (Channel Awesome), 2.4 million (Angry Video Game Nerd/Cinemassacre), 7.3 million (Yogscast) and 2.6 million (Angry Joe Show) respectively.

So yeah, right off the bat, their rules basically alienate every big content provider on the site. That's not good, especially if they start thinking about their own YouTube alternative...

Violence, including display of serious injury and events related to violent extremism

This sounds logical, although there are definite worries that it could apply to video games and media as well as real life events. Which would basically say 'no monetising Call of Duty videos'.

Controversial or sensitive subjects and events, including subjects related to war, political conflicts, natural disasters and tragedies, even if graphic imagery is not shown

So... no monetising news channels then. I'm sure the likes of the BBC are going to be really happy with this one!

And political conflicts, really? Oh, okay. Thanks for basically saying anything about Trump and the US election, anything about the recent Brexit, anything about the goings on in the middle east and anything about recent US stuff like police shootings and black lives matter is unmonetisable. That's really going to make the platform great for 'journalism' in the future!

I think this sums it up quite well:

Honestly, if YouTube enforced even HALF of their own guidelines they'd be broke in a year.

But what do you think? Do these rules show a company that completely misses the point of what their site is about? What sort of effect would this have on YouTube if they try enforcing these guidelines?

 

[Digital Doctor]

They will only enforce this stuff when they want to do it. PewdiePie saying the F word once every 20 min won't make the bar.

Specifically they will act when it makes sense (Cents) for them.

 

[Drastic]

This is single handedly one of the top reasons I plan to host more of my own videos.

Nothing worse then having a page do well, get tons of clicks, only for YouTube to either remove the video or disable ads. May as well host your own and not worry about it.

It may be best to put previews of the clips on YT just to use it as a means of promotion and driving people to your 'full video' at your site.

 

[pierce]

What you going to do when your 4k video hits 100k views? Where is all that free bandwidth coming from??

 

[Drastic]

What you going to do when your 4k video hits 100k views? Where is all that free bandwidth coming from??

You have to pay for hosting and monetize the videos. The hard part is monetizing your videos, which isn't possible out of the box with most forum scripts. You'd need an addon to maximize the earnings. A simple pause screen ad or pre/post roll with option to skip the ad after 5 seconds can perform very well depending on your niche.

If you're a membership based site, then you could require members to pay for the ability to upload the 4k videos, otherwise limit that to normal videos. Most monitors in the average surfers home probably can't render a 4k video properly anyway. That avoids ads in the videos, or at very least minimize them to the least intrusive.

Any site that is properly monetized won't have an issue hosting their own videos and would retain all traffic, also keeping users on site, sharing your own, little to no risk of the videos being removed or excluded from adsense...etc.

Look at the "wink wink" sites - tons of them hosting hour long videos and earn plenty of ad revenue to cover hosting.

BW is a lot cheaper than it used to be.

There's costs that come with hosting videos, but also lots of benefits and monetizing options from in-video ads to premium membership fees for users...etc.

It's something that requires planning and setting up properly to make sure you get the best out of it.

YouTube and similar sites are just easier in the long run.

I'm curious how these new "rules" are going to affect people with huge channels. Is it YouTubes way to get rid of people or stop paying the big boys for little things like a swear word?

 

[pierce]

Assuming money is no issue, there are other bottle necks...

Such as maximum capacity per physical interface.

Even 1080 video getting 100k views in a day could be a challenge depending on length.

Although it will probably be downloaded uploaded to Facebook and get 15 million views under a different name.../page

 

[Drastic]

Assuming money is no issue, there are other bottle necks...

Such as maximum capacity per physical interface.

Even 1080 video getting 100k views in a day could be a challenge depending on length.

Although it will probably be downloaded uploaded to Facebook and get 15 million views under a different name.../page

You'd have an appropriate server/s setup.

It's not really an issue.

We pushed 300-400k users daily on a single server, hosting our own videos, and it worked fine because the server admin was a genius (went to work at Yahoo as an engineer). Servers are way more powerful now then they were 10 years ago, much cheaper too!

It's not for everyone, but it's worth exploring for people running their sites for a living.

 

[pierce]

Oh ffs you'd make it out I'm running on a 486 dx2 with the old fashioned turbo button on the front!

My friend runs https://filecloud.io

And here has explained to me in detail what it takes to push 3Tbps or so.

Running your own video hosting isn't for the faint hearted

 

[Maxxamillion]

I'm bet this is in conjunction with the Twitter suspension of pewdiepie yesterday. His Twitter got suspended for mentioning ISIS, and he was unverified I guess YouTube are trying to follow suit to rid the community of this rubbish that is out there. I don't understand the whole bad language rule because most use bad language every now and again, I understand some of the other but some of the petty rules seem stupid. However YouTube has been cracking down on a ton of things recently to better their service

 

[pierce]

Controversial or sensitive subjects and events, including subjects related to war, political conflicts, natural disasters and tragedies, even if graphic imagery is not shown

What's sensitive, or controversial?

Like forest being cut down for palm oil and making way for cattle to graze so we can enjoy our Micky D's or Burger King?

A token black kid starving?

Having an unpopular opinion?

May as well cleanse everything.

Google could if it wanted to change its algorithm so that pewdiepie has less prevalence.

I'm sure they can even figure out click bait.

 

[cheat_master30]

What's sensitive, or controversial?

Like forest being cut down for palm oil and making way for cattle to graze so we can enjoy our Micky D's or Burger King?

A token black kid starving?

Having an unpopular opinion?

May as well cleanse everything.

Google could if it wanted to change its algorithm so that pewdiepie has less prevalence.

I'm sure they can even figure out click bait.

This is a very good question.

And what's worse, it changes a lot over time. Gay marriage was controversial just a few years ago in the US. Race and gender equality were controversial at one point. Opposing the Vietnam War was controversial at one point. Going back a really long way, there were days where opposing the Church/Bible was seen as controversial, where being seen as a witch was cause to have you hanged and where saying the Earth went round the Sun wasn't the norm.

These rules discourage people trying to move society forward using YouTube as a platform.

 

[pierce]

Showing your ankle in public was controversial at one point...

 

[Joeychgo]

Its one of the ongoing problems with Google. Left hand doesnt know what the right hand is doing. Post a photo on a forum of a scantily clad woman (no actual nudity) Adsense will send a notice... But look around YouTube -- plenty of nudity floating around, monetized by adsense.

But, being that they are virtually the only game in town -- those who live from monetized videos have little choice but to bend to their will.

 

[Drastic]

Its one of the ongoing problems with Google. Left hand doesnt know what the right hand is doing. Post a photo on a forum of a scantily clad woman (no actual nudity) Adsense will send a notice... But look around YouTube -- plenty of nudity floating around, monetized by adsense.

But, being that they are virtually the only game in town -- those who live from monetized videos have little choice but to bend to their will.

A dorky (and annoying) gaming guy mentions ISIS once and loses his verified status and gets suspended? Cmon...people have done MUCH worse on a daily basis and there's no reprimand.

Maybe you can thank https://twitter.com/jack for that.

 

[Deleted member 103109]

A dorky (and annoying) gaming guy mentions ISIS once and loses his verified status and gets suspended? Cmon...people have done MUCH worse on a daily basis and there's no reprimand.

He was also joking when he said it. A fake news company (@SkyNeiws not @SkyNews) tweeted saying he joined ISIS and he jokingly said he had joined it after RT the fake news story.

Controversial or sensitive subjects and events, including subjects related to war, political conflicts, natural disasters and tragedies, even if graphic imagery is not shown

So I guess the Jimmy Kimmel "Drunk Donald Trump" videos where they slow him down on YouTube are banned now? I guess the "13 minutes of Hillary Lying" should be removed? I guess the video of a hurricane by a weather channel should be removed? I guess a documentary on World War 2 should be removed? This is stupid! If someone is offended by a video then they can close the tab and move on.

 

[Deleted member 103109]

This is the #1 tending video on YouTube right now talking about this.

 

[Drastic]

This is the #1 tending video on YouTube right now talking about this.

I can't stand any of these videos. They're all annoying as sh*t to me.

But I wouldn't ever ban or censor them. This guy has a million people on YT, if that's not free advertising for YT, then what is?

They should send people like him a hefty check instead of warnings.

 

[pierce]

Ironically he didn't mention it.

He didn't want verified any more because of the notifications.



Then skyneiws with an I tweeted it( which is not verified) then the internet blew up showing what a joke it is to be verified.

Basic problems, that forums suffer from. Tl dr.

Drive by likes, and no actual background research.

Now like this post=1 year good luck, genius = 7 years good luck.

 

[Deleted member 103109]

I can't stand any of these videos. They're all annoying as sh*t to me.

I agree. I personally do not enjoy videos with constant swearing, but that is person preference! I can just close the tab. Others might not care, so they should be able to watch it.

 

[Drastic]

I agree. I personally do not enjoy videos with constant swearing, but that is person preference! I can just close the tab. Others might not care, so they should be able to watch it.

It's not even the swearing. It's just their utterly annoying personalities. I just sit here and think "please shut the f*ck up". Literally cannot stand those "OH HAY YOUTUUUUUBE" videos....those, PewdiePie, Jenna Marbles...ugh...the worst.

But I still wouldn't censor them!