
YouTube to limit ads for creators whose videos receive 'inappropriate comments' - pizza
https://twitter.com/TeamYouTube/status/1098756348626403328
======
ThrowawayR2
So all that one would have to do to attack a YouTube broadcaster is to leave
inappropriate comments on their videos? Trolls are going to have a field day
with this.

After reading some of the responses, this seems to the be the universal
reaction as well.

~~~
jressey

      if (innapropriate_comment_ratio < 10% && first_innapropriate_comment.created_at < 14.days_ago)
    
        punish_creator
    
      end

~~~
xg15
I'm sorry, I don't get it. Punish the creator if _less_ than 10% of the
comments are inappropriate?

Sorry if I got woosh'd.

~~~
jressey
Nah I didn't TDD. I think you're right.

~~~
xg15
Never skip on the unit tests, dude!

------
anfilt
Honestly, it is annoying to see essentially advertisers pushing others around.
Moreover, only an idiot would associate your product with content on a site
from user generated content.

I consider ads a form a propaganda because they are trying to influence your
behavior.

------
benj111
So what's an inappropriate comment?

I'm guessing, like everything else YouTube, that comments will silently get
flagged as inappropriate, and there won't actually be any rhyme, reason, or
written policy guiding what is inappropriate.

------
anfilt
That's crazy... Seeing how many comments a video sometimes can get. I don't
see how someone could go through all their comments for some videos, and it
also means they would have to keep track of this for every video posted...

~~~
jobigoud
It will obviously be automated. Which means more false positive like for
content id.

~~~
anfilt
I mean someone running their own channel. having to moderate the comment
sections to such a degree.

However, if google automates this why not just delete the comments and leave
the person/s video alone...

~~~
jobigoud
They don't really care about the comments. They are using them as a metric to
identify suspicious videos.

------
beerlord
Youtube just needs to increase the barriers before a channel can be monetised.
Then, with a smaller pool of channels, they need better human review to
prevent exactly things like this from happening.

If they are worried about the costs of a lot of non-monetised videos, just
limit non-partner channel quality to 720p30, until the channel is made partner
or coughs up something like $100.

Then, they need to allow micro-pledges in addition to likes. I would happily
buy a pack of 100 pledges for $10 (ie. one pledge = 10c) and tip that towards
the videos that I've really liked. Youtube could take their cut but it would
represent a great extra revenue stream for content creators, and the number of
pledges made public.

~~~
rchaud
> Then, they need to allow micro-pledges in addition to likes. I would happily
> buy a pack of 100 pledges for $10 (ie. one pledge = 10c) and tip that
> towards the videos that I've really liked.

This is the right way to support creators, one that doesn't introduce all the
messed up incentives generated by ad-based content monetization.

But it won't work, for the same reason it never has. People associate online
content with "free". Getting them to pull out a card is close to impossible.
This is doubly so when you consider that it's mostly kids and teens spending
hours watching these videos.

Most adults who can pay their way aren't watching toy unboxings or some
influencer's 'daily vlog'. Kids and adults alike also are unlikely to adjust
to a system where they need to remember to pledge or tip. They are watching
tens of videos per day, how would they make that decision?

~~~
olyjohn
You can pay for YouTube Premium. It lets you watch the videos ad-free. I
assume that the creators still get paid for my views, since I'm paying for the
ad-free experience. I don't even have to bother choosing who the money goes
to. Just watch their videos and they get a few cents.

