adpocalypse [UPDATE] YouTube is tightening rules of monetization further - requires 4000 hours of annual viewing & 1000 subscribers, humans will now review videos

[captain_to_fire]

Source: YouTube Creator Blog via The Verge

 

Quote

 

YouTube is tightening the rules around its partner program and raising the requirements that a channel/creator must meet in order to monetize videos. Effective immediately, to apply for monetization (and have ads attached to videos), creators must have tallied 4,000 hours of overall watch time on their channel within the past 12 months and have at least 1,000 subscribers. YouTube will enforce the new eligibility policy for all existing channels as of February 20th, meaning that channels that fail to meet the threshold will no longer be able to make income from ads.

 

The new, stricter policy comes after Logan Paul, one of YouTube’s star creators and influencers, published a video that showed a dead body in Japan’s Aokigahara forest. Last week, YouTube kicked Paul off its Google Preferred ad program and placed his YouTube Red original programming efforts on hold.

 

But this is not a new problem, and advertisers have for years complained about unexpectedly appearing alongside inappropriate videos on YouTube’s platform. The company has repeatedly promised changes to rectify the issue and has already implemented some. This new, more rigorous monetization structure can be seen as one of the more aggressive steps it has taken so far. Late last year, the company found itself dealing with a series of bizarre, sometimes disturbing videos that were targeted at children.

I don't know how this effort from YouTube would affect existing channels that have received so much bad rap lately for the shit they're doing like the plagiarizing Logan Paul. Just look at Social Blade, his channel is still growing despite the lack of new videos which makes me think that his fans are spoiled, young pre-teens with computers and smartphones without parental controls.

 

(Dear Parents in the forum. Please be on lookout on what your kids watch and play on the phones and computers you bought. Enable parental controls and restrict your kid's access to these gadgets. Remember that it is your house, your money, hence your rules. If your kid/s starts crying. Just tell them "Cry me a river kid" because no one dies from crying)

 

 

 

Not that I agree with those people who want to burn the planet to start over again, but given the hypocrisy of YouTube lately like demonetizing political commentary channels (both liberal and conservative) and censoring videos that are relevant to world affairs (which I cannot talk in detail without violating the CS) immediately just few minutes after uploading whereas YouTube would allow these kinds of videos go unnoticed, get some adsense money before demonetizing or even deleting them.

 

 

Shitty people aside, YouTube is basically punishing smaller creators that aren't making crazy shit like the Paul Brothers. Some of them are talented people like musicians (which I listen to a lot) or artists who showcase their paintings and other crafts. Why do the rest have to suffer for the sins of one person? Given how saturated YouTube is at the moment, the only chance smaller creators to gain some income is to have their videos monetized. Ten thousand views is a lot of work for a starting YouTube channel already, what makes YouTube think 4,000 hours of annual viewing is easy, much less the 1000 subs?

 

Edit: But if there's something good about the new YouTube restrictions is to curb the talentless YouTube channels like stupid reaction channels where they react on almost everything on the internet. Sorry to say this but I think most reaction channels are the laziest and talentless form of content on YouTube. Just saying.

 

But it also shows that YouTube is by no means a viable source of income unless you have a large following. To all the kids and pre-teens aspiring to be full time YouTubers, please don't. Finish school, get a real job and perhaps just make YouTube more of a part time hobby. And please, don't get mad if your parents took away your gadgets because they bought that and it's their money.

 

[UPDATE]

Humans will review video from most popular YouTube creators

Source: Phys.org

 

Quote

Google says humans will now review video from its most popular YouTube creators after recent complaints.

The videos being targeted are ones Google packages to advertisers as "preferred" content. While Google has had human reviewers before, it relies heavily on software to flag potential problems. YouTube was criticized for moving too slowly after one of its stars, Logan Paul, posted video of what appears to be a suicide victim.

 

Google said Tuesday evening that it will impose tougher requirements on which video creators can make money from ads.

 

Edited January 18, 2018 by hey_yo_
edited, added some stuff and commentary, updated that humans will review videos

[dizmo]

I think the problem is people thinking YouTube is a viable career to jump right into. It takes time to build a base, a brand, and enough of a following that you're actually considered successful. If everyone could hop on and make a living, I'm sure we'd all sit at home in our skivvies for most of the day making short videos. YouTube is much like acting. We'd all love the life, few of us have the talent and/or dedication to follow it through.Those that do, might prosper.

[TimeOmnivore]

I agree with what Totalbiscuit said on the subject (whether you like/dislike him):

 

I think this is a good move from YouTube, as creators that small aren't making much money from YT anyway and would likely make more from some of their viewers donating to them (such as via Patreon), and this prevents other abuses.

[captain_to_fire]

Just now, dizmo said:

I think the problem is people thinking YouTube is a viable career to jump right into. It takes time to build a base, a brand, and enough of a following that you're actually considered successful. If everyone could hop on and make a living, I'm sure we'd all sit at home in our skivvies for most of the day making short videos. YouTube is much like acting. We'd all love the life, few of us have the talent and/or dedication to follow it through.Those that do, might prosper.

Indeed. With the exception of a few people who gathered millions of subs in less than a year, most of the big creators actually started way back before YouTube resolution is maxed at 480p. And unless a channel as a big following, YouTube is by no means enough to even pay the bills.

[Zodiark1593]

4 minutes ago, dizmo said:

I think the problem is people thinking YouTube is a viable career to jump right into. It takes time to build a base, a brand, and enough of a following that you're actually considered successful. If everyone could hop on and make a living, I'm sure we'd all sit at home in our skivvies for most of the day making short videos. YouTube is much like acting. We'd all love the life, few of us have the talent and/or dedication to follow it through.Those that do, might prosper.

I wouldn't mind the filming, but putting out a regular stream of high quality videos would be a ton of work.

[LienusLateTips]

D*** move YouTube, now channels with small communities (like, bus and coin ones that I watch) don't have incentive to make videos other than "I like doing it".

[JaegerB]

This is YouTube's standard knee-jerk reaction to any controversially unacceptable content posted by some fuckwit.

 

As out of character for GameTheory as it is, I think this video covered this quite well:

 

[dizmo]

1 minute ago, hey_yo_ said:

Indeed. With the exception of a few people who gathered millions of subs in less than a year, most of the big creators actually started way back before YouTube resolution is maxed at 480p. And unless a channel as a big following, YouTube is by no means enough to even pay the bills.

Exactly! I guess you can explode like...what's that guy...the one who did the bending iPhone thing. But that's by far the exception.

Look at Linus. He started off super, super small.

1 minute ago, Zodiark1593 said:

I wouldn't mind the filming, but putting out a regular stream of high quality videos would be a ton of work.

So would building cosplay costumes. It doesn't mean it's a viable for everyone

[captain_to_fire]

4 minutes ago, dizmo said:

Look at Linus. He started off super, super small.

And the forum started as an actual blog made using Wordpress 

[mr moose]

So does this mean any youtube channel that doesn't meet the criteria will just get published and we won't have to sit through ads? or do we viewers still have to sit through ads while the content creator gets nothing? 

[dizmo]

3 minutes ago, hey_yo_ said:

And the forum started as an actual blog made using Wordpress 

 

Haha, learn something new every day! Interesting.

I worry about kids thinking they can just do that instead of trying hard in school. It's bad enough seeing how often abbreviations and shorthand words work their way into resumes.

[captain_to_fire]

Just now, mr moose said:

So does this mean for any youtube channel that doesn't meet the criteria will just get published and we won;t have to sit through ads, or do we viewers still have to sit through ads while the content creator gets nothing? 

There will still be ads playing (depending if the advertiser and YT algorithm allows it) but the creator will not earn his/her CPM from ads.

[Drak3]

1 minute ago, mr moose said:

So does this mean for any youtube channel that doesn't meet the criteria will just get published and we won;t have to sit through ads, or do we viewers still have to sit through ads while the content creator gets nothing? 

Likely the latter. That's how it is now.

 

If anything, monetized channels might get more ads.

[BuckGup]

16 minutes ago, TimeOmnivore said:

I agree with what Totalbiscuit said on the subject (whether you like/dislike him):

 

I think this is a good move from YouTube, as creators that small aren't making much money from YT anyway and would likely make more from some of their viewers donating to them (such as via Patreon), and this prevents other abuses.

I disagree a lot though. Youtube won't review a video unless you have 1,000 views or subs so you get get put in the non advertiser friendly category so your channel growth slows. Now on top of that you can't make any money? Youtube is really anti unique content 

[captain_to_fire]

2 minutes ago, dizmo said:

Haha, learn something new every day! Interesting.

I worry about kids thinking they can just do that instead of trying hard in school. It's bad enough seeing how often abbreviations and shorthand words work their way into resumes.

I don't know how would kids polish their resumes if the HR sees they'd rather work as a vlogger than flip burgers in Wendy's.

[Himommies]

9 minutes ago, BuckGup said:

Now on top of that you can't make any money?

They couldn't in the first place

 

[PlayStation 2]

Remember, kids: if you think putting your face on a camera and filming random shit is a viable career, you might as well enter the pornography field. It's more sustainable than YouTube.

[TimeOmnivore]

2 minutes ago, BuckGup said:

I disagree a lot though. Youtube won't review a video unless you have 1,000 views or subs so you get get put in the non advertiser friendly category so your channel growth slows. Now on top of that you can't make any money? Youtube is really anti unique content 

I mean... if you can't get 1000 views, it probably doesn't really matter whether you're advertiser-friendly or not, and you probably weren't making more than a couple of bucks, at the most. It makes it harder to get going, certainly, but given the sheer amount of creators on the platform, it shouldn't be that much harder than it already was, unless you make niche, specific content - in which case having very few dedicated fans give you a couple dollars a month is likely worth a lot more than a few hundred watching ads (assuming most aren't running an adblocker). From the very little I know about making money on YouTube, ad revenue should hardly make any difference at all until you start hitting thousands of views/video, at which point you've probably hit the criteria YouTube set for monetization.

[captain_to_fire]

18 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

Remember, kids: if you think putting your face on a camera and filming random shit is a viable career, you might as well enter the pornography field. It's more sustainable than YouTube.

A lot of porn is free so I don't know how is that lucrative? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

18 minutes ago, TimeOmnivore said:

-snip-

But if you look on YouTube's reasoning on why they're doing is is just to address the Logan Paul issue which is hypocritical. If they want to curb content like Logan Paul's, why punish the rest? Why don't they just disable his Adsense or demonetize his videos? Why should everyone be sacrificed at the altar when it's the fault of one?

[TimeOmnivore]

Just now, hey_yo_ said:

But if you look on YouTube's reasoning on why they're doing is is just to address the Logan Paul issue which is hypocritical. If they want to curb content like Logan Paul's, why punish the rest? Why don't they just disable his Adsense or demonitize his videos? Why should everyone be sacrificed at the altar when it's the fault of one?

4

Yeah, I agree that this having to do with the Logan Paul situation doesn't make much sense, and they should absolutely demonetize his videos (if not outright delete his channel), but I feel saying this move is causing others to be "sacrificed at the altar" is a bit much - the amount of money being lost from this move should be negligible at best.

[Ryujin2003]

Wow.. So I cannot get monetization at the beginning of my YT career... However, some Chinese robot with Baby Spiderman Batman Frozen Elsa Batman Shark Balloon Monkey Baby Fin Girl Boy Skirt can rack up the ad revenue with generic garbage? WTF gives YT. Instead of making it harder to start; how about policing your platform. Fun times.

 

 

And as a parent, my child doesn't watch any of this crap. He's limited to the crap on Netflix and Amazon.. And even with that, there is a specific content creator he likes to watch. Some kid who just goes on Minecraft quests all day.. Boring stuff really.

[ItsMitch]

Hey Twitch you look mighty fucking fine today

[Misanthrope]

Just now, SC2Mitch said:

Hey Twitch you look mighty fucking fine today

Indeed.

 

This is honestly a super dumb move on youtube's part: Without giving people hopes of slowly but consistently growing an audience, they'll just go over twitch. Most people might upload a handful of videos hoping one goes a little bit viral for a while to get them to 1k subs and assuming a 2 minute videos it needs 12k views.

 

Most people won't bother or will be able to sustain that, leaving only worst and worst videos only.

[captain_to_fire]

33 minutes ago, Ryujin2003 said:

And as a parent, my child doesn't watch any of this crap. He's limited to the crap on Netflix and Amazon.. And even with that, there is a specific content creator he likes to watch. Some kid who just goes on Minecraft quests all day.. Boring stuff really.

If your kid is using an Android or iOS device, you can restrict the videos he/she watches with the YouTube Kids app for iOS and Android.

[DavePlays]

Just got this email. This is ridiculous. It's so discouraging.