5 ms·

Google's response to pressures from advertisers wasn't to censor anything. They just demonetized videos that the advertisers didn't want to be associated with.

Google's response to pressures from advertisers wasn't to censor anything. They just demonetized videos that the advertisers didn't want to be associated with. Hosting someone's video for free without even interrupting it with ads seems like the opposite of censorship to me. There may be something interesting to say about how the desires of advertisers shapes our discourse, but its not censorship (in this case at least).

takeda 5y ago
Doesn't matter, they still used this as censoring (claiming YouTube cut funds to kill them). I even saw (this mostly was Facebook, but also was done on YouTube) where the channel/fan page purposefully switching videos to private while talking they are being censored.
- nitrogen 5y ago
  purposefully switching videos to private Sometimes channels will do this because they have "strikes" shown on their creator pages, so they hide their videos to avoid having so many strikes they get shut down. Some science and engineering channels I watch have run into this problem.
neverminder 5y ago
So now they are demonetizing videos that want to be monetized and vice versa. Time for YouTube's demise is long overdue. I hope Peertube, decentralization and finger to censorship is the future.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
alpaca128 5y ago
> Hosting someone's video for free without even interrupting it with ads seems like the opposite of censorship to me. Doesn't demonetization on YT just mean the ads still run but the money doesn't flow to the creator anymore? Considering YouTube does it that way with copyright claims and also automatically added ads to previously ad-free videos just because they could, it would surprise me if they'd remove video ads by themselves.
- ocdtrekkie 5y ago
  No, because the whole issue is advertisers refuse to have their ads shown with certain types of videos. The ads go away. Johnson and Johnson doesn't want their ads shown next to Nazi propaganda, so demonetization pulls advertising entirely.
- Nasrudith 5y ago
  No that is from copyright claims and the holder's desire.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Aunche 5y ago
They both censored and demonetized. You're going to have a much more difficult time trying to find Elsagate videos on YouTube anymore.
heavyset_go 5y ago
Google doesn't just demonitize videos, they make videos impossible to find by unlisting them from search results[1] and shadowbanning creators: > One of the videos that had been restricted was a trailer for one of his short films; another was an It Gets Better video aimed at LGBTQ youth. Sam had been shadow-banned, meaning that users couldn’t search for it on YouTube. None of the videos were sexually explicit or profane. > ... five YouTube channels alleged that the platform had unfairly targeted LGBTQ content creators with practices similar to those described by Bardo: demonetizing videos, placing them in restricted mode without warning, and hiding them from search results. [1] https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/lgbtq-youtube-lawsuit-censorship-877919/ https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/lgbtq-...

takeda 5y ago

Doesn't matter, they still used this as censoring (claiming YouTube cut funds to kill them). I even saw (this mostly was Facebook, but also was done on YouTube) where the channel/fan page purposefully switching videos to private while talking they are being censored.

nitrogen 5y ago
purposefully switching videos to private Sometimes channels will do this because they have "strikes" shown on their creator pages, so they hide their videos to avoid having so many strikes they get shut down. Some science and engineering channels I watch have run into this problem.

neverminder 5y ago

So now they are demonetizing videos that want to be monetized and vice versa. Time for YouTube's demise is long overdue. I hope Peertube, decentralization and finger to censorship is the future.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

alpaca128 5y ago

> Hosting someone's video for free without even interrupting it with ads seems like the opposite of censorship to me. Doesn't demonetization on YT just mean the ads still run but the money doesn't flow to the creator anymore? Considering YouTube does it that way with copyright claims and also automatically added ads to previously ad-free videos just because they could, it would surprise me if they'd remove video ads by themselves.

ocdtrekkie 5y ago
No, because the whole issue is advertisers refuse to have their ads shown with certain types of videos. The ads go away. Johnson and Johnson doesn't want their ads shown next to Nazi propaganda, so demonetization pulls advertising entirely.
Nasrudith 5y ago
No that is from copyright claims and the holder's desire.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

Aunche 5y ago

They both censored and demonetized. You're going to have a much more difficult time trying to find Elsagate videos on YouTube anymore.

heavyset_go 5y ago

Google doesn't just demonitize videos, they make videos impossible to find by unlisting them from search results[1] and shadowbanning creators: > One of the videos that had been restricted was a trailer for one of his short films; another was an It Gets Better video aimed at LGBTQ youth. Sam had been shadow-banned, meaning that users couldn’t search for it on YouTube. None of the videos were sexually explicit or profane. > ... five YouTube channels alleged that the platform had unfairly targeted LGBTQ content creators with practices similar to those described by Bardo: demonetizing videos, placing them in restricted mode without warning, and hiding them from search results. [1] https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/lgbtq-youtube-lawsuit-censorship-877919/ https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/lgbtq-...