Youtube TOS changes, basically allows no one to make money off their channels

[DokVis]

No news article yet taking about this, but its exploding on twitter
[URL]https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6162278[/URL]

Basically the new TOS means no swearing, no politics, no sexual humor, because if you do, you will not make money from your work, pretty much every channel would be effected by this.

Here is a video relating to this
[video=youtube;Gbph5or0NuM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gbph5or0NuM[/video]

[media]https://twitter.com/TeamYouTube/status/771150027951529984[/media]

[Cuon Alpinus]

Patreon, ho!

[RIPBILLYMAYS]

They're basically enforcing American TV standards by banning boobies and swear words. It feels as though they are trying to replace the role of TV in children's lives with all of these low quality, family friendly channels.

Horrible platform that is especially unfair to non-American audiences

[Magikoopa24]

I understand the reasoning behind it- advertisers hear about these drama channels and prank channels, decide to threaten Youtube to change it and so they did- but god did this just give trolls even more powers to take down monetization on videos. I can't wait to see people abuse this already terrible system even more, and by "can't wait" I mean "fuck this shit."

[Mr. Someguy]

[QUOTE=RIPBILLYMAYS;50981242]Horrible platform that is especially unfair to non-American audiences[/QUOTE]

It's unfair to an American audience too wtf

[Missing User]

[QUOTE=RIPBILLYMAYS;50981242]They're basically enforcing American TV standards by banning boobies and swear words. It feels as though they are trying to replace the role of TV in children's lives with all of these low quality, family friendly channels.

Horrible platform that is especially unfair to non-American audiences[/QUOTE]

Nicole Arbor is about to be homeless

[Deathtrooper2]

Youtube Dumbing down the populace.

"Everything is nice and fun, and you're free speech no longer matters because everything is peaches and creme"

[HazzaHardie]

'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 any kind of history and or news YouTube channel could potentially be fucked by this?

[XNiggerHunter88X]

Like 90% of my subscriptions violate these TOS.

If they don't want people swearing they should be more srict on their age guidelines and crack down on 13+ and 18+ restrictions, not fucking pull the plug on almost their entire userbase.

[darkcube445]

Youtube has just become a not so free speech area

[ColdWave]

Now it all falls down

[Septekka]

[QUOTE=HazzaHardie;50981259]'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 any kind of history and or news YouTube channel could potentially be fucked by this?[/QUOTE]

was gonna mention this

fuck anyone who tries to make an informative/educational video about some war or disaster or something i guess

[Zillamaster55]

This isn't some "free speech" problem, this is a pants-on-head retarded corporate administration problem. Channels like LegendOfTotalWar, RedLetterMedia, and thousands of others will now no longer be able to make money.

[isak]

I 100% understand why advertisers don't want their brand plastered in front of and associated with some Swedish guy screaming curse words and making rape jokes while playing video games. That's reasonable. And I get why YouTube doesn't want to seek out other advertisers to play on inappropriate content, since then they'd just be filled with porn ads.

But this is fucking tough. Plenty of people live off of YouTube. Forcing them to be 100% family-friendly or restricting their access to advertising is going to hurt both them and YouTube, because loads of them are just going to turn off advertisements and then push Patreon hard.

Very upsetting, but if I owned a company I wouldn't necessarily want it to be associated with someone screaming curse words and flinging dildos around.

I don't blame YouTube, I blame advertisers and puritanical American culture.

[srobins]

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50981281]I 100% understand why advertisers don't want their brand plastered in front of and associated with some Swedish guy screaming curse words and making rape jokes while playing video games. That's reasonable. And I get why YouTube doesn't want to seek out other advertisers to play on inappropriate content, since then they'd just be filled with porn ads.

But this is fucking tough. Plenty of people live off of YouTube. Forcing them to be 100% family-friendly or restricting their access to advertising is going to hurt both them and YouTube, because loads of them are just going to turn off advertisements and then push Patreon hard.

Very upsetting, but if I owned a company I wouldn't necessarily want it to be associated with someone screaming curse words and flinging dildos around.

I don't blame YouTube, I blame advertisers and puritanical American culture.[/QUOTE]

They should just mark "profane" content producers and then filter ads based on that. It's really not a tough decision, YouTube is just run by actual idiots.

[thrawn2787]

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;50981278]This isn't some "free speech" problem, this is a pants-on-head retarded corporate administration problem. Channels like LegendOfTotalWar, RedLetterMedia, and thousands of others will now no longer be able to make money.[/QUOTE]

I'd wager rlm makes their money off patreon now

In their last video I think they put clips from movies in on purpose just to fuck with the system

Same with Jimquisition

[carcarcargo]

Well there goes just about every single channel that I watch then lol

[chemo]

I doubt this is going to work out very well, I bet it won't be very long until they reverse these changes.

[Miya]

[media]https://twitter.com/Idubbbz/status/770881278283436032[/media]
[media]https://twitter.com/Idubbbz/status/770881535213875204[/media]
[media]https://twitter.com/Idubbbz/status/770882033212022784[/media]

[dennistrane]

Basically killed off Pewdiepie the #1 channel

[_charon]

You think anyone working at YouTube has ever watched YouTube before?

[zukriuchen]

surely this is a terrible marketing decision?

[editline]31st August 2016[/editline]

[QUOTE=Wii60;50981318]tweets[/QUOTE]

hopefully this is how it stays
a mostly feel-good measure that only targets titles

[Humblebumbled]

[Quote]Sexually suggestive content, including partial nudity and sexual humor[/Quote] Good luck making money, youtube.

Also,

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT6XO5Ova2o[/url]
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hi0hAxuhdPo[/url]

NostraJacksfilms

[zeromancer]

At what point did YouTube turn around and say, guys, you know what's a fan-fucking-tastic idea, you know those people who live off YouTube revenue, right, get this, if they swear, prohibit them from making money.

Knobends.

[meppers]

how about you let the individual advertisers that buy youtube ad slots decide if they want their ads to be on obscenely vulgar videos?

[IlluminatiRex]

[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;50981278]This isn't some "free speech" problem, this is a pants-on-head retarded corporate administration problem. Channels like LegendOfTotalWar, RedLetterMedia, and thousands of others will now no longer be able to make money.[/QUOTE]
Oh shit, The Great War might be affected by this considering they cover a war, and frequently show images and videos from said war.

[isak]

[QUOTE=srobins;50981287]They should just mark "profane" content producers and then filter ads based on that. It's really not a tough decision, YouTube is just run by actual idiots.[/QUOTE]

They already do this to some degree - they use your Google account and search history and shit to serve you ads based on your age, interests, and so on.

That's why I'm blaming the advertisers and not Google/YouTube. Google knows that they can personalize advertisements exactly to the individual - meaning that if you're a 30-year-old watching a kids' show on YouTube and you've been searching for different car models recently, serving you an ad for a new car type is reasonable even if it isn't necessarily relevant to the actual content you're watching.

Advertisers are looking at YouTube like television, and ignoring that it's a personalized thing. You could serve a 30-year-old porn addict porn ads on YouTube [I]regardless[/I] of the content they're watching and shit would be fine, because the advertisement delivered is based on the [i]user[/i], not on the content. But advertisers don't want that, they want to control their brand image exactly, so they're treating it like television and trying to get relevant ads to specific [i]types of content[/i] instead of specific types of [i]users[/i].

Google's not stupid enough to suddenly decide "I guess everything should be family-friendly." I'm convinced the advertisers are being stupid and insisting that Google eliminate content that could "harm" their brand, even though it's far more effective to push ads based on users over content type.

[TurtleeyFP]

This is so catastrophic I have trouble believing it was fully thought out. If anything, sounds like an advertiser said "do something about offensive videos", an idiot in marketing said "ok" and got a coworker to spend 2 hours making an algorithm to search for curse-words and turn off monetization for them.
There was 0 warning for content creators about this, and they've backpedaled on smaller shit before.

[helifreak]

[QUOTE=dennistrane;50981322]Basically killed off Pewdiepie the #1 channel[/QUOTE]

The silver lining on a cloud of shit.

[isak]

I think everyone here is missing a key phrase from the new TOS:

[B]If the video does contain inappropriate content, the context is usually newsworthy or comedic and the creator’s intent is to inform or entertain (not offend or shock).[/B]

This really isn't banning curse words in your favorite comic's channel. This is a continuation of YouTube's attempts to push away wildly inappropriate content. Porn thumbnails, clickbait offensive titles, shock content - that's what they're preventing from being monetized. iDubbbz's tweets make me think this isn't quite as insane as it sounds - there's a specific stipulation that says [I]inappropriate content in the name of comedy and entertainment is permitted.[/I] Context is important. This isn't [I]that[/I] bad, digging in to it, and the only real, popular YouTuber (and not clickbait trash) I can think of who might have some trouble is Filthy Frank or other "shock" YouTubers.