
The disturbing YouTube videos that are tricking children - jimsojim
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-39381889
======
ergothus
When I was pretty young (kindergarten) I would read "Our Universe" over and
over ([https://www.amazon.com/National-Geographic-Picture-Atlas-
Uni...](https://www.amazon.com/National-Geographic-Picture-Atlas-
Universe/dp/079222731X) ). Most of what was there I barely understood, but I
understood enough to keep coming back.

A few years later (2nd or 3rd grade) I got into a mild argument with my music
teacher when she off-handedly mentioned there was not life on other planets in
our solar system. I was insistent that there was and I had seen pictures. To
her credit, she asked me to bring her that evidence, and once I did she
explained what part of the text said - these were hypotheticals. _If_ alien
life could live in Jupiter, what might it look like.

I remember a vague sense of disappointment at the time, but overall I think
I'm glad I was fooled in that way at such a formative age. Forming big
thoughts from what I read and later learning what part of what I read meant
that changed my conclusions is a lesson that I think turned out well for me.

In contrast, I think Santa is a terrible, terrible thing - adults lying to
kids about something that is already fun and wonderful to the kids, and then
using it as a threat ("better be good or else!"), only to eventually have the
kids learn it was all a lie...I fail to see much positive coming from that.
(and yet, people are aghast at the very prospect of kids finding out early -
it would "ruin" the holidays)

I'm not really sure where the material discussed in the article fall - it read
to me like these was material that WASN'T intended to trick children, but
rather targeted at adults without making that clear, but I might be
misunderstanding.

------
godmodus
There's a ton of abuse on YouTube.

The content is generally made for an older public, that's how YouTube started
and that's what the content is for

The problem isn't YouTube per se, it's our understanding of it, and as a
result, the laws we bring forth to try and manage it.

It's like sending your kids down to buy something from a corner shop or when
you send them to school on their own. It's we the adults that make sure they
know better than to talk to strangers.

I think thoigh the street metaphor isn't too accurate, since a normal corner
stop wont have hookers and dirty magazine pedlers trying to get your kid off
for a buck. The Internet does though, and it'll be an interesting problem to
solve, without destroying the mechanisms that allow innovation.

I think most people here anyone are aware of this, wbut do we really know how
deep the rabbit hole goes?

~~~
chromalife
The videos mentioned in the article seem to purpose made to scare kids under
nine who want to see their favorite cartoon characters. Limiting the
discussion to YouTube, Google needs to acknowledge how many children spend
time browsing videos on their site and make a YouTube Kids with only approved
providers and strict moderation.

~~~
enzanki_ars
Youtube already has this as an app for Android and iOS:

[https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.and...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.google.android.apps.youtube.kids)

[https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/youtubekids/id936971630?mt=8](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/youtubekids/id936971630?mt=8)

------
HoppedUpMenace
Consider a young child, maybe 5 or 6, who loves animals very much. Now
consider that this child is living in the year 1991 and watching a documentary
about Zebras on the National Geographic channel. Now consider that during the
course of this show, a Zebra has an unfortunate encounter with a lioness or 5,
which the kid never expected and is likely very upset by what they see. Should
there now be a nationwide discussion/outrage about how National Geographic
portrays nature? Or should parents rethink their parenting habits by actively
monitoring what their kids watch on TV, in 1991? Same goes for the Youtube and
the Internet in general, why would you let your kid have free reign on either
platform knowing the potential for bad content? Maybe if a parent could pre-
watch the videos on Youtube before letting their kids watch it to insure its
legit, then kids wouldn't be tricked by the fake stuff.

------
sauronlord
Tricking children?

You let your toddler or child on the internet with no supervision and then
they find something you do not like.

What kind of victomhood article is this?

~~~
trakout
Agreed. Also YouTube ToS defines the service to be used by individuals aged at
least 13 years and up. Point 12:
[https://www.youtube.com/static?gl=CA&template=terms](https://www.youtube.com/static?gl=CA&template=terms)

------
mathiasben
This is the inherent problem in having children's programs produced by adults.
If parents would strictly monitor their children's viewing habits and ensure
only content produced, directed and written by toddlers entered the home this
problem wouldn't happen.

------
maerF0x0
There is a big need for a "safe" internet for minors. Another point is that
free pornography asks "Are you sure you're 18?" and takes their word whether
they are 11 or 19.

I, for one, would pay an extra fee to ensure that the internet provided by my
ISP was filtered for child inappropriate content. And for platforms that had
mixed content, could be blocked until those platforms created safe subdomains
like "childsafe.youtube.com" or what have you.

~~~
i336_
That could viably work, but has one downside.

If you shift all the way to the extreme of "super safe", when the inevitable
bored trolls come along and figure out how to game the automated filter and
get gore/porn/whatever into the safe sandbox for long enough for it to get a
few views, the news will have a field day from the resulting chaos.

Ultimately, any company that tries to do this will get bad press.

You would literally need a mod team running 24/7 vetoing every single video
before okaying it. And you'd need like a 7-second delay for streams.

But then you'd have the problem of "hi whoever's watching this video and
making sure it's okay".

Closed/private video streams with a bounded number of participants would be
the responsibility of those who joined the group though.

So it's really a money question. And the fact that you'd need 1.5-1.8 mods
(however you'd implementationally interpret that) to get around human
tiredness and boredom, driving costs up.

------
shadyrudy
I have a simple rule for these videos: No crying videos. If the characters are
crying, they are usually getting tortured, attacked, etc, much like the
article states. I didn't have to enforce the rule very long since my 5 year
old has moved on to Super Mario Run videos. What I don't understand is how
these videos and channels haven't been banned due to copyright and trademark
infringement? Sure,

------
jdalgetty
My 3 year old son absolutely loves the "scary peppa pig" videos

------
valuearb
My daughter just watches "real dragon" videos, she's desperate for proof they
really exist. Fortunately she understands they are all likely fake.

------
sjg007
We just banned youtube and youtube kids unless a parent is there. Basically
those unboxing toy videos are worse than ads.

