3 ms·
I thought it was just as simple as the fact that the big companies don't want to advertise their products on "controversial" videos... which are defined very lo
by jgrowl 9y ago
I thought it was just as simple as the fact that the big companies don't want to advertise their products on "controversial" videos... which are defined very loosely based on key words. For example if you make something like a rape surviver support video and include 'rape' in the description.
I can see why advertisers would not want to risk hurting their brand by playing before a video that is anyway offensive to anyone. If you give that power to them then they will use it. Which can be a problem if you are trying to have an open free speech platform where ideas are shared. I think that is not Google's motivation though. They want to make money. Which again is understandable but not necessarily what the world needs.
- dahdum 9y agoIt was less of a problem a few years ago, before groups started claiming that Google & advertisers were explicitly supporting / promoting controversial content. With the PR fear in full swing, there is very little upside to either party allowing advertising. For example, groups were actively hitting the top commercial websites and then visiting Breitbart so they could screenshot retargeting ads to use in shaming the company on social media.