4 ms·

Maybe this is real, but it doesn't seem to line up with what I have heard from other Youtubers. Firstly it is almost certain that a video is initially demoneti

Maybe this is real, but it doesn't seem to line up with what I have heard from other Youtubers. Firstly it is almost certain that a video is initially demonetized by an algorithm. Only during a manual review is it looked at by a human. The main complaint from Youtubers is that the algorithm is way too strict and inconsistent. But the manual review process is pretty fair and the vast majority of videos get remonetized. The issue here being that by the time a manual review is complete most of the views for a video have already happened. I could of missed it, but I have seen very few complaints about the manual review process being overly strict or biased.

airesQ 9y ago
Couldn't the algorithm give its judgement before the video goes live?
- kthejoker2 9y ago
  YouTube is trying to roll out something like this, it hasn't taken effect yet though.
- falcolas 9y ago
  YouTube's advice to creators is to do exactly this - post the video privately to let the algorithm and potentially the human review go through before making it public. Sadly, since this process can take up to 48 hours, this doesn't work if your videos have any kind of time sensitivity. It also doesn't help with videos of streams, which are automatically posted immediately after the stream's conclusion.
  - freeone3000 9y ago
    It also doesn't work - uploading a video privately passes monetization, uploading the same video pubically has the video monetized. It's completely arbitrary.
LeifCarrotson 9y ago
> The issue here being that by the time a manual review is complete most of the views for a video have already happened. Wouldn't the solution, then, be to credit the account for the revenue generated while it was demonetized? It's not like Youtube didn't get revenue from ad impressions while the video was flagged.
- kthejoker2 9y ago
  Sorry, when they say demonetized, they mean "ad restricted" as in no ads are shown. The issue being advertisers don't want their ads shown against objectionable content.
- jacksmith21006 9y ago
  Google does not benefit from demonetized content but instead hurts as they still have infrastructure expense.
majani 9y ago
I wonder why you're the only skeptic in a forum that's usually skeptical about every post. Yes, you're right, this is not Google's MO. Google tend to look for software based solutions first and foremost before resorting to humans to solve problems. Recently Google have really been working on their voice transcription software and I imagine they could easily design a bot that scans subtitles and video frames for offensive content
- _dps 9y ago
  In the past I would have agreed with your skepticism, but they just announced a huge human-powered review team: http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/05/technology/google-youtube-hiring-reviewers-offensive-videos/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/05/technology/google-youtube-hi... I don't know based on that article if it's directly related, but they've obviously decided that they need serious human review teams.
  - majani 9y ago
    Wow, my mind is blown. Makes me now feel like all those claims Google made in the past about how impractical hiring a customer care team would be for them was just pure BS.
jbob2000 9y ago
They are probably using the manual reviewers to train an ML model to look for these things. It's going to take some time, but I think it's possible to get the models to match the manual reviewers.

airesQ 9y ago

Couldn't the algorithm give its judgement before the video goes live?

kthejoker2 9y ago
YouTube is trying to roll out something like this, it hasn't taken effect yet though.
falcolas 9y ago
YouTube's advice to creators is to do exactly this - post the video privately to let the algorithm and potentially the human review go through before making it public. Sadly, since this process can take up to 48 hours, this doesn't work if your videos have any kind of time sensitivity. It also doesn't help with videos of streams, which are automatically posted immediately after the stream's conclusion.
- freeone3000 9y ago
  It also doesn't work - uploading a video privately passes monetization, uploading the same video pubically has the video monetized. It's completely arbitrary.

LeifCarrotson 9y ago

> The issue here being that by the time a manual review is complete most of the views for a video have already happened. Wouldn't the solution, then, be to credit the account for the revenue generated while it was demonetized? It's not like Youtube didn't get revenue from ad impressions while the video was flagged.

kthejoker2 9y ago
Sorry, when they say demonetized, they mean "ad restricted" as in no ads are shown. The issue being advertisers don't want their ads shown against objectionable content.
jacksmith21006 9y ago
Google does not benefit from demonetized content but instead hurts as they still have infrastructure expense.

majani 9y ago

I wonder why you're the only skeptic in a forum that's usually skeptical about every post. Yes, you're right, this is not Google's MO. Google tend to look for software based solutions first and foremost before resorting to humans to solve problems. Recently Google have really been working on their voice transcription software and I imagine they could easily design a bot that scans subtitles and video frames for offensive content

_dps 9y ago
In the past I would have agreed with your skepticism, but they just announced a huge human-powered review team: http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/05/technology/google-youtube-hiring-reviewers-offensive-videos/index.html http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/05/technology/google-youtube-hi... I don't know based on that article if it's directly related, but they've obviously decided that they need serious human review teams.
- majani 9y ago
  Wow, my mind is blown. Makes me now feel like all those claims Google made in the past about how impractical hiring a customer care team would be for them was just pure BS.

jbob2000 9y ago

They are probably using the manual reviewers to train an ML model to look for these things. It's going to take some time, but I think it's possible to get the models to match the manual reviewers.