YouTube Networks Drop Thousands of Creators

R

rgMekanic

[H]ard|News
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
6,943
Polygon is reporting that the future of multi-channel networks is in question, as thousands of creators are purged from Fullscreen, Ritual, BBTV, and more MCNs. Starting a few weeks ago, Fullscreen started dropping creators from their network, seemingly without cause, however now, in an an email, Fullscreen told one of its former creators that they had been dropped because of "a decision that comes from YouTube and is out of our control."

Messages from Howard Pinsky, director of creator marketing at Fullscreen posted on a public Discord had this to say:

"YouTube is 'forcing' all networks to remove creators that are at risk of violating terms of service (copyright issues, misleading thumbnails, etc)," Pinsky said, according to a screenshot of that message. "This isn't a decision from the networks, but one from YouTube. They're really starting to clean up the platform. Fullscreen (and other networks) have zero say in this. This is a decision from YouTube. From what they explained to us, many channels that posed a risk of violating YouTube's terms of service, even if no strikes were present, were released."

While I've never understood the point of an MCN for 99% of creators, this is still yet another way YouTube is driving smaller channels off it's platform. I'm still hoping that Pornhub comes out with a "Youhub" or something for people to migrate to. Thanks to cageymaru for the story.
 
MCNs have become increasingly worthless as time goes on anyway. The protection they used to offer does not exist and, for the most part, they only exist to take money from creators and give them nothing in return. Most big creators got their audience on their own and not with the help of MCNs.
 
This is actually a pretty substantial issue. People violate TOS for youtube nonstop and only complain when youtube starts enforcing its own policy. This issue came into play because they failed to adequately police their own service that was wantonly abused and violated. The thumbnail issue is 100% real, I've seen hundreds of videos that have thumbnails which violate the TOS of youtube:

Misleading or racy thumbnails

Please select the thumbnail that best represents your content. Selecting a sexually provocative thumbnail may result in the removal of your thumbnail or the age-restriction of your video. The thumbnail is the title card that will be shown next to your video across the site and should be appropriate for all ages.


If you are uploading a parody, review or vlog, please choose appropriately representative metadata that will not confuse users into believing that your video is something it is not. This is especially important to remember in relation to current events or viral videos. Please select a thumbnail and title that clearly illustrate that your video is commentary and not footage from an actual event. Videos that are deemed deceptive will be removed from the site and strikes may be issued to the uploader.

I'm sure you can all think of one off the top of your head as well that would be in violation right now.

Misleading metadata

Metadata refers to any and all additional information provided on a video. This includes the title, description, tags, annotations, and thumbnail. The reason we have metadata is so that you can add additional contextual information to your videos. Please do not use these features to game or trick our search algorithms. All metadata should be representative of the content contained in your video. Among other things, metadata added in an attempt to game search algorithms will lead to the removal of your video and a strike against your account.


Please select a reasonable number of tags that most closely reflect your video content. Please also only add tags to the tag section of your metadata. Adding additional tags to the description of your video may constitute spam and can result in the removal of your video.

There are probably over a million videos that violate this bad boy. There are countless videos that have links to pirated or copyright infringing content, or otherwise just mislead people into clicking their video eg. "FULL HAN SOLO STAR WARS MOVIE HD 1080p".

Filtering out and banning accounts like this alone is a daunting task. While they do a lot of it, it's virtually impossible to keep up with it due to the sheer volume of content created and posted on youtube. Of course they don't want to pay actual humans to browse the content so if you're good at figuring out how to trick the ai algorithm they have scouring youtube content, unless you are directly reported, you will go unnoticed.
 
I think it's rare that YouTube would ban a video channel that provides good content (I keep hoping they'll ban WatchMojo, but they haven't gotten to it yet.)

This is another phase in the internet. Remember the early 2000's when the screenscrapers were all over the place, making websites by bulk-copying other websites and using marketing and keyword tools to move up in the search lists?

The other day I was on a news website and at the bottom was a link to "Hollywood Actors Who Are Registered Sex Offenders," and their thumbnail was a picture of George Clooney in a tuxedo. That's awfully close to defamation.
 
Dick Johnson said:
"creators that are at risk of violating terms of service"

WTF does that even mean? You're either violating the TOS, or you aren't.
Click to expand...
They are probably referring to videos of things are so close to violating without actually crossing the line. I.E. Some chick wearing pasties, that aren't considered "nude" Even though you can see her entire boob you just can't see her nipple. That type of violation. Or showing so obvious that its pushing the limit to the extreme.
 
SomeoneElse said:
They are probably referring to videos of things are so close to violating without actually crossing the line. I.E. Some chick wearing pasties, that aren't considered "nude" Even though you can see her entire boob you just can't see her nipple. That type of violation. Or showing so obvious that its pushing the limit to the extreme.
Click to expand...


i think i need some evidence to examine to see how i feel about this

;>)
 
Not surprised seeing that Youtube has needed to limit how much they give to content creators nowadays. The advertising pie is too small to support the number that they are currently supporting. This is just one way of the first step of weeding out creators. We will probably see more steps taken in the future.
 
I have a conspiracy theory. Wasn't the first major change to YouTube when PewDiePie made a controversial video, and the mainstream media pointed it out as well as the fact that advertisers where "connected" with that and other videos? My theory is that ever since, the members of the mainstream media have been doing things behind the scenes to YouTube because they see that more people watch it than they do the 7:00 news. They are dying, and they won't go down without a fight. This results in YouTube's visible changes, but perhaps their hands are tied.
 
I've watched a few videos on the subject from some of my favorite channels. The main thing I remember is that the number of content creators that Youtube is paying has increased by a factor of 10 while ad revenue has only doubled in the same time period. Add in the controversies, where advertisers (not Youtube) pull the money, and you have Youtube caught in a catch 22. Youtube's current business model is not sustainable, and something has to give.
 
Tsumi said:
I've watched a few videos on the subject from some of my favorite channels. The main thing I remember is that the number of content creators that Youtube is paying has increased by a factor of 10 while ad revenue has only doubled in the same time period. Add in the controversies, where advertisers (not Youtube) pull the money, and you have Youtube caught in a catch 22. Youtube's current business model is not sustainable, and something has to give.
Click to expand...

Youtube's business model was never sustainable. That is exactly why so many Youtube competitors fail.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top