Youtube Post 2020

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
iannis

iannis

Musty Nester
31,351
17,657
I've watched lectures on YouTube I would have no access to otherwise.

Baby, bath water. YouTube is a net positive. Administration is trying to keep it one, but in typical administrative fashion doing the opposite.

Don't be a mist.

Sure, it doesn't have to be named youtube. It does not have to be a Google product. But it is and it is.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users
Chukzombi

Chukzombi

Millie's Staff Member
73,144
214,431
Tv was turning into a reality TV wasteland. All of it staged bullshit. I rather watch real stuff on YouTube. Real stuff that affects real people. No shaniqua doesn't fall off the top floor of the parking garage and then gets back up to kick some ass. But jocelyn does go thriftng for vintage goodies? I'm your huckleberry.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users
Lithose

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor
25,946
113,036
sukik said:
Conspiracy theory time. That FTC lawyer is a real twat talking about shooting youtube "fish in a barrel".

Click to expand...


Its not really a conspiracy theory. Big media has been dumping a ton of money lobbying Congress to strangle various facets of the internet that competes with them. Youtube is an especially big target of theirs. All of big media's humiliations over the last 10 years in terms of news have come from Youtube; having a large repository of news clips that illustrate direct hypocrisy is absolutely devastating to their control over information.

Beyond that, as technology grows the ability for small creators to compete directly with Disney and other big brands is growing. In 30-40 years, as AI really begins helping with CGI in the same way programs streamlined and made editing easier, you're going to see smaller and smaller teams able to crank out the kind of content that would have been movie quality in the 70's. Heck, you're already seeing that now for art house studios. Once a youtube team can do that with 3-4 people, you're going to get a deluge of competition for services like Diney+ and Netflix, and that's already a very competitive market. They are looking to head off the most efficient, free publishing service for those creators--because I think most media understands that the crux of what makes this all work is how distribution of information has been democratized with not only the internet but the software developed in the 00s to let people do that for free (Youtube being a major part of that).
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: 2 users
Lithose

Lithose

Buzzfeed Editor
25,946
113,036
Ravishing said:
You got it backwards.
The "For Kids" videos will not have targeted ads..
That's the whole point of this.

So just mark everything "Not for kids"... kids still find it and you still get revenue.


Click to expand...


You're missing a piece. The problem is if you label something as "not for kids" and the FTC thinks it really is for kids--that's what draws the fine. The only way to be safe is to label everything "for kids", that eliminates targeted ads. And its the targeted ads which trip the FTC's rule.

This all stems from an FTC lawsuit against LAI (A kids game app). While LAI didn't personally collect information, the FTC asserted that if you have a third party ad program and that ad program collects user data from a child, you are guilty of collecting that data without notice yourself.

The essence of the problem is its now VERY unsafe to run targeted ads if your channel has anything which some suit at the FTC can construe as "for kids" on your channel.
 
sukik

sukik

<Gold Donor>
3,186
8,269
Lithose said:
Its not really a conspiracy theory. Big media has been dumping a ton of money lobbying Congress to strangle various facets of the internet that competes with them. Youtube is an especially big target of theirs. All of big media's humiliations over the last 10 years in terms of news have come from Youtube; having a large repository of news clips that illustrate direct hypocrisy is absolutely devastating to their control over information.

Beyond that, as technology grows the ability for small creators to compete directly with Disney and other big brands is growing. In 30-40 years, as AI really begins helping with CGI in the same way programs streamlined and made editing easier, you're going to see smaller and smaller teams able to crank out the kind of content that would have been movie quality in the 70's. Heck, you're already seeing that now for art house studios. Once a youtube team can do that with 3-4 people, you're going to get a deluge of competition for services like Diney+ and Netflix, and that's already a very competitive market. They are looking to head off the most efficient, free publishing service for those creators--because I think most media understands that the crux of what makes this all work is how distribution of information has been democratized with not only the internet but the software developed in the 00s to let people do that for free (Youtube being a major part of that).
Click to expand...

I agree with Brad's assessment, but it's gotta sound pretty crazy to normal folk who still consume regular cable TV.
 
Ravishing

Ravishing

Uninspiring Title
<Bronze Donator>
8,456
3,577
Lithose said:
You're missing a piece. The problem is if you label something as "not for kids" and the FTC thinks it really is for kids--that's what draws the fine. The only way to be safe is to label everything "for kids", that eliminates targeted ads. And its the targeted ads which trip the FTC's rule.

This all stems from an FTC lawsuit against LAI (A kids game app). While LAI didn't personally collect information, the FTC asserted that if you have a third party ad program and that ad program collects user data from a child, you are guilty of collecting that data without notice yourself.

The essence of the problem is its now VERY unsafe to run targeted ads if your channel has anything which some suit at the FTC can construe as "for kids" on your channel.
Click to expand...
I disagree with your assessment, but I'm sure there's always an exception to the rule. If a channel is clearly advertising toward kids then yes I can see where they might still get fined, even if the videos are tagged otherwise... I also have no issue with that type of fine if that's the case. It needs to be an egregious act imo. Not some pencil necks at the FTC browsing YouTube and deciding to fine channels just 'cause.
 
Lanx

Lanx

<Prior Amod>
66,088
150,611
this is how garbage youtube is
fe3c2d18b226990b6876ffe87df898d5.png


it's just a bunch of American Inventors laughing to old bill burr skits. yea it's old, look at em, bill burr still has hair.

a million views? wtf is this bullshit "content" this isn't content, this is trash, and when they flag their channel as not for kids, they're gonna get 0, dollars.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
GuardianX

GuardianX

Perpetually Pessimistic
<Bronze Donator>
7,187
18,214
People talking about Youtube but holy shit I wonder about TWITCH now..

I mean is live streaming not covered under this COPPA ruling?

If it is, I wonder how twitch is going to approach it.
 
Lambourne

Lambourne

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
2,948
7,018
Fits in this thread I guess. CGPGrey got suspended for impersonating himself.

3 minute vid

 
  • 1Worf
Reactions: 1 user
Goatface

Goatface

Avatar of War Slayer
10,090
16,545
GuardianX said:
People talking about Youtube but holy shit I wonder about TWITCH now..

I mean is live streaming not covered under this COPPA ruling?
Click to expand...
Twitch Services are not available to persons under the age of 13.

5 years or so ago, google/youtube let under 13's make their own accounts
 
GuardianX

GuardianX

Perpetually Pessimistic
<Bronze Donator>
7,187
18,214
Goatface said:
Twitch Services are not available to persons under the age of 13.

5 years or so ago, google/youtube let under 13's make their own accounts
Click to expand...

I think that is the issue though isn't it?

The "Reality" vs the "Company Policy". For a child to have an account previously, it was anchored to a parent account if I recall. That account for the child was shown no ads and no data was retained from it's usage (Believe this if you want...I don't).

Written into their TOS as of today for youtube and google:

1574787291817.png


Yet, the market information came out and they are shown to be the largest web product for people from 2-20 basically.

I would argue the same results for twitch too, or at least a non-financially insignificant number for the under 13 viewer segment. Seeing as how they are both "Targeting" the same market of "Legally allowable aged peoples" for marketing but their demographics are much younger than the stated, I really don't see how Twitch could argue that they aren't in the same boat unless they are playing the route of plausible deniability.
 
OneofOne

OneofOne

Silver Baronet of the Realm
6,935
8,783
GuardianX said:
I really don't see how Twitch could argue that they aren't in the same boat unless they are playing the route of plausible deniability.
Click to expand...

Goatface said:
Twitch Services are not available to persons under the age of 13.
Click to expand...

OneofOne said:
COPPA is so poorly thought out, there's a lot of "wink, wink, nudge nudge" that has to go on to even TRY and make it work in the real world.
Click to expand...

Our platform requires you to enter your age, so we can appropriately revoke certain services/features from underage accounts. We know you are telling the truth about your age because... we don't. But not our problem you lied. And pretty much all sites are like that. Which is why the law is retarded.
 
Namon

Namon

Blackwing Lair Raider
1,976
2,565
GuardianX said:
I think that is the issue though isn't it?

The "Reality" vs the "Company Policy". For a child to have an account previously, it was anchored to a parent account if I recall. That account for the child was shown no ads and no data was retained from it's usage (Believe this if you want...I don't).

Written into their TOS as of today for youtube and google:

View attachment 233801

Yet, the market information came out and they are shown to be the largest web product for people from 2-20 basically.

I would argue the same results for twitch too, or at least a non-financially insignificant number for the under 13 viewer segment. Seeing as how they are both "Targeting" the same market of "Legally allowable aged peoples" for marketing but their demographics are much younger than the stated, I really don't see how Twitch could argue that they aren't in the same boat unless they are playing the route of plausible deniability.
Click to expand...


This ... you have to be over 13 to even have an account, so that COPPA law is kind of moot from the get go. And if they are thinking of lurkers... then require a (free) login to actually view videos.

I really do think this is the big companies trying to squeeze out the people who are exposing them (alternative media) and such, coupled with the fact that Google really hates that they are known for just random rednecks showing how to blow up or fix their chevy beater (or both).

As a parent I'll be sad if this affects the channels that are legit for kids. My kids both have a long list of channels they watch regularly that they kind of grew up with like Popular MMOs and Gaming with Jen and Stampy. Super annoying to me but it's their childhood... like Sesame Street being annoying to my parents but a major part of mine.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
GuardianX

GuardianX

Perpetually Pessimistic
<Bronze Donator>
7,187
18,214
OneofOne said:
Our platform requires you to enter your age, so we can appropriately revoke certain services/features from underage accounts. We know you are telling the truth about your age because... we don't. But not our problem you lied. And pretty much all sites are like that. Which is why the law is retarded.
Click to expand...

I'm not discounting that the law is stupid.

I'm saying that I'm pretty sure that people are discounting the far-reaching nature of this ruling, that it can or WILL impact places outside of YOUTUBE. Basically it impacts all sites that host or distribute video (live video included?) material that also "target" ads to users based on criteria harvested from the users account and history.

Namon said:
This ... you have to be over 13 to even have an account, so that COPPA law is kind of moot from the get go. And if they are thinking of lurkers... then require a (free) login to actually view videos.

I really do think this is the big companies trying to squeeze out the people who are exposing them (alternative media) and such, coupled with the fact that Google really hates that they are known for just random rednecks showing how to blow up or fix their chevy beater (or both).

As a parent I'll be sad if this affects the channels that are legit for kids. My kids both have a long list of channels they watch regularly that they kind of grew up with like Popular MMOs and Gaming with Jen and Stampy. Super annoying to me but it's their childhood... like Sesame Street being annoying to my parents but a major part of mine.
Click to expand...

The "Over 13" part is the part expressly talked about in certain videos as the deciding factor on the WHY of COPPA even existing in the first place.

Basically, as was said in whoever's video, Google was sitting on the fence eating from both sides of the fence. They stated their policy was "Only people over 13 allowed on the platform" in an account sense while flaunting that they basically control the video space for the demographics of 2-12 year olds viewing content on their platform.

This blatant disregard of the rules in regards to targeted advertising of children under the age of 13 was the "WHY" of COPPA existing, as per that video.

Sure they don't ALLOW people under 13 to have an account but...as you said...they turn a blind eye to the problem BUT then also profit from the problem.

---

THE ABOVE is why I think people are underestimating this ruling.

Because of the above:
  • Un-enforced / Lax enforcement on accounts of persons under the age of 13
  • Targeted advertising that derives results from harvested and retained user data
ANY site that serves:
  • Targeted Advertisements
  • Video Content that can be used to target minors
  • User accounts that allow age inputs on the honor system
Seems like it could be in for some really rough waters ahead since places like TWITCH basically fall ENTIRELY under COPPA, their content is ENTIRELY based around content that would appeal to children and thus any of their targeted advertisements would almost certainly pull advertising data from a child.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
Goatface

Goatface

Avatar of War Slayer
10,090
16,545
Namon said:
As a parent I'll be sad if this affects the channels that are legit for kids. My kids both have a long list of channels they watch regularly that they kind of grew up with like Popular MMOs and Gaming with Jen and Stampy. Super annoying to me but it's their childhood... like Sesame Street being annoying to my parents but a major part of mine.
Click to expand...
been watching a lot of creators take on the issue. i knew of Stampy as friends kid used to watch him all the time. apparently he "retired" for a year anyway, watched his vids on it, said his viewers are 50/50 kids and teens, so his channel will be pretty much done.
don't think anyway around PopularMMOs not getting channel wide "for kids" tag. they have to be in the million $ per year club
will be interesting to see what happens to them, they currently get like 2mil views per day.
 
Namon

Namon

Blackwing Lair Raider
1,976
2,565
GuardianX said:
I'm not discounting that the law is stupid.

I'm saying that I'm pretty sure that people are discounting the far-reaching nature of this ruling, that it can or WILL impact places outside of YOUTUBE. Basically it impacts all sites that host or distribute video (live video included?) material that also "target" ads to users based on criteria harvested from the users account and history.



The "Over 13" part is the part expressly talked about in certain videos as the deciding factor on the WHY of COPPA even existing in the first place.

Basically, as was said in whoever's video, Google was sitting on the fence eating from both sides of the fence. They stated their policy was "Only people over 13 allowed on the platform" in an account sense while flaunting that they basically control the video space for the demographics of 2-12 year olds viewing content on their platform.

This blatant disregard of the rules in regards to targeted advertising of children under the age of 13 was the "WHY" of COPPA existing, as per that video.

Sure they don't ALLOW people under 13 to have an account but...as you said...they turn a blind eye to the problem BUT then also profit from the problem.

---

THE ABOVE is why I think people are underestimating this ruling.

Because of the above:
  • Un-enforced / Lax enforcement on accounts of persons under the age of 13
  • Targeted advertising that derives results from harvested and retained user data
ANY site that serves:
  • Targeted Advertisements
  • Video Content that can be used to target minors
  • User accounts that allow age inputs on the honor system
Seems like it could be in for some really rough waters ahead since places like TWITCH basically fall ENTIRELY under COPPA, their content is ENTIRELY based around content that would appeal to children and thus any of their targeted advertisements would almost certainly pull advertising data from a child.
Click to expand...

You are right on all of this. I know they talked about that but in the end you still have to 13 and that law should stop there, but because government and law are run by retards, we all know it isn't. But not to derail but seriously this thought has been on my mind since I saw news of this yesterday:

What difference is there between this kind of targeted advertising or say advertising that is targeted to kids who watch Nickelodeon? Or Cartoon Network? Why is TV ok but not internet? I'm not talking the weird ass creeper videos of Elsa fucking Spiderman or the even weirder ones where kids film themselves in bathing suits (what the fuck parents??).... I'm strictly talking about advertising. I absolutely do not see the difference between Youtube taking videos meant for kids and pushing kid advertising and Nickelodeon taking shows meant for kids and pushing kid advertising. i'm not arguing that advertising is good or bad... it just doesn't seem things are equally viewed or applied here at all.
 
Namon

Namon

Blackwing Lair Raider
1,976
2,565
Goatface said:
been watching a lot of creators take on the issue. i knew of Stampy as friends kid used to watch him all the time. apparently he "retired" for a year anyway, watched his vids on it, said his viewers are 50/50 kids and teens, so his channel will be pretty much done.
don't think anyway around PopularMMOs not getting channel wide "for kids" tag. they have to be in the million $ per year club
will be interesting to see what happens to them, they currently get like 2mil views per day.
Click to expand...

Yeah and ... dude's voice makes me want to punch kittens... but in the end my daughter loves them and while annoying they are good clean fun. Now granted... they could make millions off merch though. My daughter already has all their books, and if they released shirts or whatever of their cat, cloud, she'd buy those too. And I'd have no problem doing that at all because they do have value. But at the same time, I don't get my panties in a bunch when a commercial for latest toy, or cereal, or whatever comes on during Spongebob, I have 0 problem with the same coming across one of their YouTube videos either.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
OneofOne

OneofOne

Silver Baronet of the Realm
6,935
8,783
GuardianX said:
Lots of stuff
Click to expand...

Sorry, I guess I assumed this was all understood already. COPPA is 19 years old. I'm not saying that as a snark. As they are finding their feet and winning cases, COPPA enforcement has been spreading wider and wider. COPPA applies to every site on the intertubes. Every single one. Now, it may not effect them, but it still applies to them. Things get murkier for non-US sites, but not even getting into that.

Namon said:
You are right on all of this. I know they talked about that but in the end you still have to 13 and that law should stop there, but because government and law are run by retards, we all know it isn't. But not to derail but seriously this thought has been on my mind since I saw news of this yesterday:

What difference is there between this kind of targeted advertising or say advertising that is targeted to kids who watch Nickelodeon? Or Cartoon Network? Why is TV ok but not internet? I'm not talking the weird ass creeper videos of Elsa fucking Spiderman or the even weirder ones where kids film themselves in bathing suits (what the fuck parents??).... I'm strictly talking about advertising. I absolutely do not see the difference between Youtube taking videos meant for kids and pushing kid advertising and Nickelodeon taking shows meant for kids and pushing kid advertising. i'm not arguing that advertising is good or bad... it just doesn't seem things are equally viewed or applied here at all.
Click to expand...

I think you are confusing what COPPA is. It's not anti-targeted advertising, it's anti-information collection.

"The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act ("COPPA") specifically protects the privacy of children under the age of 13 by requesting parental consent for the collection or use of any personal information of the users."

It's only intersecting with advertising because of the way YouTube operates and HOW they determine who to target ads to. If you stick on an episode of Smurfs on TV, you can run all the kids ads you want because neither the channel running Smurfs nor the owner of the show is actively collecting information about the viewers. YouTube does though. And going back to what I said previously, it's such a PITA to work within COPPA, many sites just say fuck it and outright block shit from kids so they don't have to deal with it. That's the tack YouTube is taking right now.
 
Namon

Namon

Blackwing Lair Raider
1,976
2,565
OneofOne said:
Sorry, I guess I assumed this was all understood already. COPPA is 19 years old. I'm not saying that as a snark. As they are finding their feet and winning cases, COPPA enforcement has been spreading wider and wider. COPPA applies to every site on the intertubes. Every single one. Now, it may not effect them, but it still applies to them. Things get murkier for non-US sites, but not even getting into that.



I think you are confusing what COPPA is. It's not anti-targeted advertising, it's anti-information collection.

"The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act ("COPPA") specifically protects the privacy of children under the age of 13 by requesting parental consent for the collection or use of any personal information of the users."

It's only intersecting with advertising because of the way YouTube operates and HOW they determine who to target ads to. If you stick on an episode of Smurfs on TV, you can run all the kids ads you want because neither the channel running Smurfs nor the owner of the show is actively collecting information about the viewers. YouTube does though. And going back to what I said previously, it's such a PITA to work within COPPA, many sites just say fuck it and outright block shit from kids so they don't have to deal with it. That's the tack YouTube is taking right now.
Click to expand...

Ok yeah but then we circle back to if an account is supposed to be 13 or over... then by all measures, the parents agree that data is being collected on that account. If the account is made in secret, I just think at that point some form of responsibility needs to fall on the parents. It's kind of the same with kids maxing out the parent's credit cards for MTX in shitty phone games. Ok yeah, it sucks, but I don't feel sorry for you because legit it's not that hard to keep on top of what your kids are doing in 2019. It's not anyone's fault but your own if you are too retarded or lazy to do so.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
sukik

sukik

<Gold Donor>
3,186
8,269
The only thing I'm sure of is that Google and the FTC are somehow going to make this a gigantic fail for everyone. Anything perceived as child related is going to be toxic for creators. Gone will be the days when we can see some weird stuff like this on YouTube:
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: 2 users
You must log in or register to reply here.