Yeah, let's talk to SummoningSalt about how his *one hour and twenty minute* Mega-Man 2 video was demonetized because one of the individuals in it swore *once* about 50 minutes into the video.


That was the exact video I was thinking too. There was so much time and effort put into it and the one swear word by someone else, being used as a historical record, was enough to make that one of his lower performing videos ever. As ProZD alludes to, the donkeys planned that out.


It's like demonetizing national geographic for showing boobs in a culture that doesn't censor them


Or demonetizing History Channel for having Nazi symbols in a documentary about Nazis.


Now that’s just plain silly We all know YouTube doesn’t demonetize nazis, come on now


I'd be more surprised by the documentary about Nazis being on the history channel. Did the Nazis have to pawn something to fund the war or something?


YouTube still advertises on demonitized videos. This policy was just used to save YouTube from paying out to the creators for millions of videos.


That's what's crazy. If the creator can't make money from a video **THEY CREATED** then YouTube should t be making money off of it either.


definitely smells of a suit n' tie coming up with a strategy of "if we just fuck over 1/10 people there wont be enough momentum for them to jump ship, but we'll increase revenue by 20%"


Since apparently when a video is monetized Google gets to keep 45% of the revenue, if they were to gain the extra 55% for only a mere 10% of videos... So more like 10% increase. Feeling kinda bummed now, it took me time figuring how to calculate this because I'm slow like that lol, hoping it would show that Google are just needlessly scraping at pennies - but seeing a 1-1 in percentage increase of revenue for the proportion of videos you demonetize ain't negligible sadly...


It's wild what companies with monopolies can do, eh?


Wait...fucking what?? This is absolutely asinine




I remember years ago Angry Joe talked about an hours long livestream he (or someone else, can't remember) had about various video games. They had 5 seconds of Nintendo footage in the video and Nintendo claimed the ad revenue on the *entire* stream. It shouldn't be possible with so many IPs on screen, but YouTube probably didn't care or maybe they reversed the decision but it's insane that was allowed to happen.


I think YT eventually plugged the loophole, but for a few years, whenever Jim Sterling used Nintendo footage they also just included a bunch of footage from other companies that overreach on copyright. Since there would be multiple claims on the video, no one would get the ad revenue. Called it the Copyright Deadlock.


It helps that they never intended to get the ad revenue on the videos in the first place. They did the copyright deadlock to prevent other companies putting ads on the videos, because they didn't want ads on them since it was supposedly funded by Patreon instead of ad revenue. The copyright deadlock didn't help anyone who actually wanted to earn the ad revenue from their own video.


Want to hear something even worse? People are getting demonitised because the fucking AUTO GENERATED CAPTIONS are mishearing words and writing them down as swears. Check out Charlie's (MoistCritikal) recent videos on the topic if you want to learn more.


Isn't that probably just the same thing? ie. That both the auto generated subtitles, and auto detection of swear words, both use the same way of detecting what is being said in the video to then determine if it should be punished or not?


That's exactly the case. Anyone thinking humans are doing this doesn't understand YouTube.


Us: Hey YT, get your shit together! YT: hee-hawwwww!


> Wait...~~fucking~~ Gosh darn what ??


This statement is still enough to get demonetized based on the new rules.


That was a mighty fine video. Too bad he got shafted out of his well earned revenue.


Everyone reading this thread can help try to make things right by supporting SummoningSalt because his content is fucking phenomenal.


Facts. It's the BGM he uses for his videos that do it for me


We're Finally Landing by Home is a banger


He single handedly made it the speedrunning anthem. I put my hand over my heart and shed a patriotic tear every time it comes on.


In what fucking world would Summoning EVER get demonetized. The man is a legend


Most things: I sleep SummoningSalt demonetized: To war


I love how most of his videos are short and get whatever message across.


My favourite thing about Youtube is that at the start short videos were the rage, animation channels really prospered, then Youtube decided videos needed to be at least 10 minutes long so a lot of short-form content disappeared to other platforms and then Youtube figured out people like short-form content so now they push Youtube Shorts which is basically just Instagram and Tiktok content recycled because almost nobody stuck around on Youtube to make that content.


Yes, but now it's short-form content with fewer controls and vertical 🥲 Or if you're on mobile, vertical shot video with useless borders making it a tiny video.


It's a fucking abomination on desktop


It also fucks their queue function that I love so much. ProZD is a legend for sticking to just regular videos for his short content. I hate Shorts.


IIRC YouTube converted a bunch of his videos into shorts automatically. He asked his viewers if they'd like him to re-upload them as non-shorts and the answer was a resounding yes.


It's so over engineered and pointlessly complex. They don't need a totally separate system, just add the label to any short video, add a filter, and a new feed. That's it. That's all they had to do and it would have been much better.


Among other things, it depends on who you're trying to target with your videos. Shorts are a fantastic way to get new people to see your content. They're almost always an abysmal way to retain subscribers.


> Shorts are a fantastic way to get new people to see your content. People who watch shorts tend to watch shorts. People who watch long form content tend to watch long form content. So, people subbing in from the shorts feed probably won't watch regular, non-short, videos you post and the reverse is true as well. This kinda wrecks you in the normal algorithm, but doesn't affect you in the shorts algorithm as it's a bit more generous in pushing your content out. (source: *I've used shorts and long form content to build a small YuGiOh related Youtube channel over the last year, year and a half. Shorts preform better, for me, 9/10 times. Could be my niche, but that's my experience.*)


I tried a few shorts on my small channel (31k) to see if people wanted them, mostly because it’s a revenue push by YouTube. Resounding no and lost some subs. Fine. I deplore vertical video anyway.


I wouldn't even call it a revenue push. The money on shorts is still penis bad. Edit: just to give people an idea of how bad it is. I have a short with 185k views that's monetized. It's made like around $0.60.


I wish I could hide them, or I wish they didn't autoplay. And why the hell do they repeat!? What TikTok shit is that!?


I like shorts! They're comfy and easy to wear!


Dammit to hell, Joey. Go back to playing with your rattata.


His rattata is in like the top 10% of all rattata.


[Youtube-shorts block puts them in the regular player](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/youtube-shorts-block/jiaopdjbehhjgokpphdfgmapkobbnmjp)


For Firefox there's [Enhancer for YouTube](https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/enhancer-for-youtube/) that has an option to convert shorts into regular videos.


Thanks. A lot more convenient than changing it manually.


You can switch out the "shorts" part in the link with "v" and it starts playing as a normal video!


It's an abomination anywhere




No volume control, it's honestly hilarious they thought that was fine.


Oh you've slightly touched the mouse wheel? Let's play the next video. Fricking annoying and they don't seem to fit on screen


No it's great on desktop, especially an ultrawide, because I can now watch 14 videos at once without even having to reduce their size. It's done wonders for my efficiency.




Oops, you vaguely glanced near your scroll wheel, so now it's switched to a completely different and totally random video. You can go back, but you have to start over because there are no video controls for no reason whatsoever.


I like that I don't know who published the video till I click on it. it helps me view more right wingnuts when I intentionally keep trying to avoid them.


Someone sent me an instagram video the other day so I click it, and it starts playing automatically with the volume muted. I unmute so I can hear and then try to restart the video and... I can't? Okay I'll just refresh the page. So I click refresh, and the video starts playing immediately... With the sound muted. I spent another 20 seconds on it and figured out my options were to immediately pause after refreshing, or to hold my mouse over the unmute button and hit f5, then click the second it loaded. By that point I'd long since lost any interest on what the contents of the video were so I just closed it and resolved never to click another instagram link. Knowing how the internet works, I expect I could probably fix it by signing up and going into settings or downloading an extension or something stupid, but I'm just not interested in visiting a site where the interface is actively fighting me. Makes me feel like the "old man yells at clouds" meme when I slowly see every single new app being built the same way. I miss when applications used to compete on features instead of on... Whatever it is they're doing now.


And they keep making it harder to deal with. I used to have a script that would automatically find the `


Every day that goes by I feel more and more like an old geezer because 90% of my internet use is done via desktop and everything is being delivered to my browser like I'm on a phone. I can't even relate to a lot of redditors that complain about reddit anymore because I'm still hanging out in the Paleozoic era using old.reddit.com and have no idea what they're talking about.


Someone on Reddit once asked me about my reddit avatar and all I could say was "my *what?*"


Two months ago the GenX sub posted a PSA on how to block some annoying ad with somebody eating a taco or something. I was like, "Wait, reddit has ads?"


Same for me. When somebody mentions an username I remember that I can hover over a name and I get little modal window, actually two (I think one from reddit and the other one from RES) with one of those showing the avatar. Also similar to following people on reddit, as in subscribing to their account when it comes to stuff I don't use. Apparently on new reddit you can also submit posts in your /u/"your name" directory instead of in a subreddit and they get listed with all your other comments and submissions if one were to browse to your username. I think it's supposed to make your user directors into an ad hoc blog. I think some people even subscribed to me (like a handful at most, I looked up the numbers one time before changing away from new reddit as it's not a feature on old reddit) but I don't use it like that so they get nothing from that… or just a feed of my comments without context? If I want to blog I'll set one up, I'm only on Reddit for shitposting purposes.


>Someone on Reddit once asked me about my reddit avatar and all I could say was "my *what?*" Sometimes people *DM* me and I tell them I didn't see their message in my inbox. Reddit has IM! lmao


Old.reddit.com is the only rational way to use the website on a computer without add-ons.


I will die with Old.reddit. Every time I accidentally come across New Reddit it's so ugly and bloated. It gives you a snippet of text posts but not enough and they need to be opened in a new page to see the rest. Tiles for everything, unecessary sidebars, trending top bar. Reddit Enhancement Suite and Old Reddit for me. Only see what I want to see and have a dozen posts at once with all the preview information compactly shown with good sized thumbnail. All without leaving the page you're on unless you want to see the comments.


Yeah, if they ever remove that, I'm gone. Can't stand to look at the site otherwise.


If we can move on from Digg, we can move on from Reddit.


The sidebars are so ridiculously massive! And they truncate threads after like three posts! Even on mobile that's absurd!


Worse, if you’re not logged in then *they actively hide comments from you*. There have been a number of times where I would Google something in a private tab, find a Reddit response, switch it to the old style, and suddenly find *more* months-old comments visible. New Reddit actively hides comments from non-users, presumably because they think it will be more attractive without them.


Even on my phone, I use old.reddit.com because I refuse to download a fucking app, and new reddit requires you to click "Load more" after every other comment if you want to see more of the discussion. And then half the time, it'll redirect you to a new page, which is annoying enough on its own, but then when you go back in your browser, it won't remember the comments you loaded, so now you're completely lost and I throw my phone at the wall out of frustration and the screen repair bills are starting to add up.


I use reddit is fun now. If they shut down 3rd party apps and/or old.reddit I'm just done.


If they take old.reddit away from me I'll be pissed and probably reduce the time spent here to a tenth percent or less. On the other hand... That sounds like a good thing


I'd just quit if they did that. Reddit is the last of the big forums. I liked forums. I'm old and snarky and hate all this newfangled shit.


Yeah, feels like the dying days of horizontal layouts and it sucks. The issues with vertical layouts and wasted space literally drove me off FB and now everyone is adopting it to serve content to phones. I'm just asking for the OPTION for horizontal content at this point.


My average screen time on my phone is 19 minutes a day. Everything that needs to be internet-ed I do on a laptop. I too feel ancient because of it, but it's just not possible to do things efficiently on a phone. Some of the kids that work for me do everything on their phone. One of them was filling out DOL forms on his.....and of course they got screwed up.


I might consider using new reddit if it wasn't a laggy, bloated mess that wastes half of its screen real estate


if you watch in a browser replace /shorts/ in the url with /v/ for it to play as a normal video


There is also this which does it for you: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-shorts-block/ For Chromium users: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/youtube-shorts-block/jiaopdjbehhjgokpphdfgmapkobbnmjp


Shorts are worse because you HAVE to do them in stupid vertical video or at least square video to get it to work, so it FORCES you to do stupid vertical video shit.


That's what you get when you give the CEO position to someone solely because it was "their idea to buy YouTube". Don't look for anyone that has any experience in content production or anything, lol.


Oh kinda like a certain megalomaniac doing the same thing with a social media site that has a bird as the logo... Lol


I strongly dislike shortform content for some reason.


I can't do short-form content in one monitor and my game in the other, unless I let it pick the videos for me, and we all know how bad YouTube gets if you watch the stuff it suggests for you.


YouTube is definitely going to start jamming multiple ad breaks into his content


Lmao, his voice for Youtube is the best


And his cosplay is absolutely *spot on*.




He was Ratatosk in GOW Ragnarok


Oh no way! I kept thinking Ratotosk's VA was great.


Yeah I’m still not over the removal of dislikes. It causes problems almost daily. I can't believe we’re not still rioting over that, it’s fucking unbelievable. EDIT: yes ffs I’ve heard of the extension but it’s not a good solution when you are accessing YouTube from a phone or doing on-the-fly research from another device.


Can we talk about the death of sort by oldest?


For real. Still no extension to fix it either.


If YouTube has removed that sorting option from their API, there's really no extension that can restore that functionality. The only way to get the oldest video programmatically will be the same way you do it manually: start at the top and scroll to the end of the list.


It’s so annoying having to scroll all the way to the bottom, especially if the YouTuber has over a 1000 videos and I can’t remember the name of it. Like why the *fuck* is YouTube getting rid of features everyone liked?


The same reason why working systems are frequently broken at workplaces. Because someone has to put their fingerprints all over a project so that they can put it into their annual review for their boss. There's no glory in maintaining projects, just changing them until you can cherry pick a positive metric. It's a big reason why Google kills so many projects.


I haven’t updated YouTube on one of my devices, and sort by oldest still works. So it’s still in the API. I complained at YouTube about it on Twitter and they said it’s because of their change to filter by shorts and they’re “hoping to fix it”. Bullshit. They removed it because it was somehow not making them enough money.


There's actually a hidden playlist for each channel, which is the entire channel's videos. You can view this playlist by appending a special playlist id to a video on the channel. see this comment: https://i.reddit.com/r/LifeProTips/comments/247c2u/lpt_youtube_how_to_play_all_videos_from_a_channel/izd3ttq/.compact but tldr; append `&list=ULcxqQ59vzyTk` to the URL of a video on the channel, and find the playlist on the right side.


I've been upset so long that you can't search by year. I was really into Ocarina Of Time modding videos when I was a kid and I know some of them I remember so fondly must be up but there's no way to search for them.


You can, in a way. "before:20xx" https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Ocarina+Of+Time+modding+before%3A2007


>Can we talk about the death of sort by oldest? This is YouTube wanting to slowly park away those ancient 12+ year old videos so their servers won't ever have to recall the file ever again. Then eventually they'll just disappear to the age of time. Sucks as you'll rarely see where these 10 year YouTubers first started.


trouble is that there is no alternative service to keep youtube on it's toes, so any complaints, rants, petitions or what not else will be ignored


Yep, same story for most of the tech giants at this point. Zero competition has led to decline in consumer friendly practices across the board for a while now. Most people will attest to how much better the internet used to be.


Yeah. I reckoned by now we'd have many extra side functions for streaming services. But we are still fighting on which platform has the program(s) you like, we stopped progressing on side functions that better help the viewing experience, even as simple as what Amazon streaming did with showing you the list of cast members currently on screen when you pause.


Tbh, I think this was always the inevitable outcome. Its easier to battle it out by programming then by making the service better, because better usually means less monitization. Cable channels originally got you to pay for it by being commercial free. Didnt take long before they were speeding up movies and chopping out parts to make room for even more ad breaks. Its almost weird watching shows from the 2000's online because you tell where it was written to accoumt for each ad break.


Because streaming services aren't competing as a streaming service, they're competing as a content library. The viewer is a captive market to the content created, owned, and distributed by the same company. Every digital market is full of vertical monopolies and no one gives a shit and actively rejects arguments as to why that's a bad idea. Everyone is pissed off at Netflix and its continuing degradation as it keeps raising its prices and making other poor moves to increase revenue, but fail to realize that Netflix was good because it had a varied content library from across the industry. Netflix only started getting bad when every media company pulled their streaming licensing and made their own exclusive services. Meanwhile Netflix as an actual streaming service (that is to say, the actual service itself and not the library) is STILL the best there is. Every other service has maybe some minor little innovation at best (like Prime and the actor placards), but otherwise mostly suck on the whole. It's all about digital copyright, which is broken because Congress and regulatory agencies basically haven't done anything to manage or keep pace with the digital market in 20 years.


Thats because you are not the consumer. You are the product.


Shit, even just a few years ago ads were way less invasive. Now there's 2 ads to start the video, 2 in the middle, and 2 right before the video ends. It's insane. There's YouTube vanced and stuff but we shouldn't need to sideload apps just to have a usable experience


Thats if the video is 5-10 minutes. Longer videos can start having an insane amount.


Just today I watched a 20 minute video that had 2 ads before starting, 2 after the 3rd minute, and another 2 after the 6th minute. It's absolutely ridiculous, to the point where I'm actively avoiding watching YouTube on the TV (I have an adblocker on the PC).


Shit like that is why I’ll eventually have a Pi-hole. No way my kids are going to be watching those ads if they need to look anything up on YT.


PiHole doesn't work for YouTube. YouTube delivers ads from the same domain names as their actual content so PiHole's blocking method via DNS is not effective.


DailyMotion is still around. If only it wasn't ugly as sin and blocks adblockers.


and vimeo is still around, but both of those platforms doesn't seem to want to try to make themselves attractive to same consumer base and it's habits




If you get too popular on Vimeo, instead of paying you [they'll send you a bill!](https://twitter.com/JennyENicholson/status/1493345972386086916?t=syfX12QciH7YorZfNpWtng&s=19)


Andrew from Channel 5 News posted on Patreon a while back, Vimeo told him if he wanted to keep his videos it would be over 16k per year to do it.


Vimeo wouldn't be able to handle the amount of pointless garbage that gets uploaded to youtube every minute.


Because no one has the resources of Google to be able to provide immense amounts of free bandwidth to run the platform. At least, no one that wants a Youtube-like platform without the massive advertising capabilities of Google.


Yeah, that's the real key. Any idiot with a CS degree could throw together the shell of a youtube clone, but the hard part is managing and serving up the billions of years worth of video that they store.


Also, remember that every video gets re-encoded at various bitrates to serve people with lower/higher quality connections. Just imagine how much processing power it takes to re-encode the 30k hours per hour of video that gets uploaded--much less the storage necessary to hold it.


Many folks out there wonder why there isn't a 1:1 Youtube competitor yet. The truth of the matter is that something like Youtube is really expensive and complex, therefore incredible difficult to replicate, both on the technical aspect and the financial/business side. Besides the obvious storage and bandwidth issues, which are huge challenges, there are even the biggest obstacles for replicating the Youtube experience. You need a robust search engine behind your streaming service for relevant results. Google is 5-10 years ahead of its nearest competitor on that front. Imagine a new player trying to replicate that. You need a powerful ad tech platform so that you are delivering the right ad to the right audience at the right time so that your advertisers, which are you true clients, get the most out of their buck. Again, Google is 5-10 years ahead of its nearest competitor on that front. Again, imagine a new player trying to replicate that. You need an vision AI platform to look at and classify the content that is being uploaded at scale, for curating purposes, for copyright purposes and for brand safety purposes (advertisers do not want their ads on content with nudity, curse words, racism, etc..) Again no one else can come close to do it at the scale Google is doing. And replicating that is ridiculously expensive. You need a global ads sales force, a global billing and collections staff, a global copyright and policy staff, etc... Add on top of all of that the globally redundant storage, encoding and decoding capacity plus bandwidth costs and you begin to realize just how dauting the idea of making a direct Youtube competitor really is. Youtube as a viable business was possible only because it piggybacked on the Google AdSense infrastructure, which allowed it to scale. Not even Amazon, Microsoft or Facebook have tried to replicate Youtube because they know how difficult/expensive it is. The only true competitor Youtube currently has is TikTok, which does not allow long form videos nor videos to be easily searched. And before anyone brings it up... no, Pornhub does not operate anywhere near the scale that Youtube does, so it highly unlikely that someone like Pornhub could produce a viable Youtube competitor.


I was actually just posting about this the other day. YouTube, based on reasonable estimates about how much content is uploaded a day, is in the exabytes territory in storage. Just getting all that storage up and running across multiple data centers around the world and hiring all the people to maintain *just the storage* would be hundreds of millions of dollars. An exabyte is something like $20/TB for cheaper enterprise spinning drives, and let’s be honest, a site like this is probably using top shelf drives. If they go for SSDs, we are looking at $160+ per terabyte. A singular exabyte is one *million* terabytes. And I doubt it’s a *singular* exabyte, at this point they might even be in the tens of exabytes. Just the disks alone will cost tens of millions lowest estimate, but probably hundreds. Oh, and that’s if they didn’t have redundancy- and there’s absolutely no way they do not, so double or even triple that. Then, the servers required for handling the sheer I/O bandwidth not to mention network traffic ain’t going to be cheap either. I’m not sure if their media is encoded/transcoded/decoded on the storage servers - I would assume no, but Google is super secretive. Point is, hardware costs alone could get as much as half a billion dollars to be able to reach YouTube’s *storage* capacity. *Just* storage. Really hard to tell since Google never discloses any of this. Obviously if there was competition they wouldn’t need quite as much as YouTube since both would likely split traffic, but still. And that’s just *storage hardware.* This is why there isn’t a viable YouTube replacement. Monetizing video hosting is *hard* because it’s a very high bandwidth and storage intensive task, and people won’t want to pay to upload or watch videos. YouTube was bleeding money for *years* before Google started going *hard* with advertising and YouTube premium and the like. But simultaneously it has a very high barrier to entry. This combination just makes it not viable for any company that isn’t already pretty financially secure to be able to approach it. Probably only Amazon, Microsoft, or Apple could pull together the resources for it - and Apple only because they’re *loaded*. And even if they tried, they’d have to work *real hard* to push it as an alternative to YouTube. I just don’t see a YouTube competitor being fully viable anytime soon. Maybe ever. I mean look at the Mastodon situation. It’s getting a ton of attention right now due to Twitter imploding, but its not likely to *actually* catch on. Even after solving all your technical problems, there’s also just a lot of luck, timing, and guerrilla marketing involved.


Dailymotion used to be a competent rival back in the days. Vimeo also somehow only a niche product.


Vimeo wants to be a service for professionals to host and serve high-quality videos to a specific audience, not a place where you host your vlog.


It’s clear why they did it; big companies didn’t like getting ratio’d.


But not displaying the likes/dislikes on a video was an optional setting for years. Companies could have just done that. I think it's much more about them forcing their automatic recommendations onto you. Like they did when removing categories from the front page and reducing the amount of videos you could see without scrolling. I guess their goal is to be more like TikTok where you don't have to actively choose what you're watching, which means you have less moments to question if you should do something else.


Companies like youtube


I doubt YouTube gives a shit. Companies selling products with trailers that get massive dislike ratios reported in the news, on the other hand, probably do care a fair amount. Enough to threaten not to spend advertising money on the platform.


companies that advertise on youtube




Disney prob made the biggest stink. After the ratio of downvotes following the disaster that was rise of skywalker no way they didn’t pressure YouTube.


The removal of dislikes is insane. Why did they even do it? * It's being paraded as a way to take pressure off of creators. * It most likely was for advertisers' benefit. * It allows insane amounts of abuse, fraud, and scams to now run unhindered whatsoever. "How to learn X thing in 30 days" [*20% Like ratio*] **[Skip]** "dx3dx9_43.dll missing in Y_Game, how to fix. Download in desc" *[200 likes 3412 dislikes]* [**Probably a virus, Skip**] For the latter scenario, you'll now see those virus videos with 100%^ likes, whitelisted comments that all praise the creator, and no way to know at a glance whether they are about to waste your time, try to infect you with a virus, or scam you.


I'm going to tell you something that will possibly fuck your life up once you know it, because you'll see it everywhere. Designers intentionally remove features from users, in order to control their behavior, for profit. A small example of this was Amazon removing the "sort by most reviews" feature. See by combining that feature with a filter that only showed products rated at 4 stars and above, you could instantly see the most purchased, highest quality products, and be finished shopping in just a couple of minutes. But that's not Amazon's goals. The best product may not make Amazon the most money. They may want to push other products on you. They may want to charge sellers a fee for pushing their products on you. So, they made it harder for you to shop. Youtube has done the same thing with dislikes. They make money when you ***watch*** videos. Not when you click on them to check the ratio. So if you have trouble finding what you're looking for, and have to watch multiple videos to find a suitable one, that's more money in Youtube's pocket. If you ever run into the issue of a company removing a useful feature you like, remember that it's not an accident on their part, or them being out of touch with their users' needs. It's very calculated.


We live in a QVC presentation masquerading as a society.


Netflix did it too. They used to have a great recommendation algorithm. But they started making terrible Netflix shows and they got 1 starred too much. So they changed it to like/dislike and still recommend terrible shows to you even if everyone dislikes it. The start of their slow but inevitable downfall.


Yeah, and even more recently than the dislike thing... Youtube has changed their search algorithm as well, so that only the first few results are what you searched for. Then it cuts to other "categories" like, "People also watch", then shows you a few more of your results, then a new category, etc. I fucking hate it.


Next up, IMDb removing movie ratings, so as not to hurt the feelings of those involved in making movies, in case some movies have low approval ratings, or high dislike counts. Actually, on a more serious note, I've no doubt movie ratings ARE being manipulated on there now, especially for certain controversial movies, probably Rotten Tomatoes too.




I'm old enough to remember YouTube also having a 5 star rating system.


I love to have no idea whether the car repair video I'm about to watch is total dogshit


It has made YouTube completely useless for finding informative videos.


That would be stressful AF to have to rely on YT to pay your bills. YT is at the mercy of the advertisers. If one day they say they arent seeing the same RIO as before then paychecks for YTers may be cut in half. i actually see that coming in the near future. Soon YT will be only monetized for those great parents that exploit their children on "family" channels.


At least for ProZD it isn't his main source of income


I respect that video he made a few months back saying he will make whatever tf he wants and doesn’t rely on what viewer wants out of him. He’ll post what he wants, when he wants. Plus he has a sick resume in voice acting, so I’m sure his priorities go towards that.


The best, is when he tells the story about youtube getting him a channel manager and the guy quit a few weeks later. Editors are shock that he still doesn't make thumbnails for his channel https://youtu.be/sSLrYZkoArQ?t=912


He's got quality content, it's a good day when his video pops up on my unwatched list, I don't even know what his video thumbnail whatever looks like, nor should it even matter


I see his face or a reference to one of his characters in the title and I immediately smash it. I can't help it. His stuff just gives me the good feelings


Trash taste podcast had him on and all three of them had their minds blown at his process of choosing a thumbnail. Absolutely hysterical how little Pro cares but his videos still deliver.


> Edditors are still shock he doesn't make thumbnail for his channel  \/^-E o  o^(3-)\\ OMG!  |     O     | wtf? Watch this video. INSANE ENDING STICK AROUND! I SHOW YOU WHY!


>paychecks for YTers may be cut in half. i actually see that coming in the near future. This has already happened hella times in Youtube's history. Both because of ads just not paying what they used to, discoverability being nerfed into the ground for particular types of content, moving from views to watchtime, and that's just what comes to mind. Youtube has been finding more and more way to pay people less for more.


Didn't they also change the rules of monetization. Like you had to have x amount of subs, and viewers to monetize anything


The fucked up part is that the whole point of being a child friendly platform isn't because of the advertiser's image at all. Like, if anything, as an advertiser, you'd want to advertise to adults who can spend money on your product. And that's because they don't want a child friendly platform. They want an idiot friendly platform. And children are fucking idiots, and when they see the ads for these mobile games they're gonna steal their parents credit card and buy a shitload of micro transactions. It's so fucking predatory on YouTube's part. They fucking know what they're doing. And, quite frankly, it's something they need to be monetarily punished for. They aid and abet in scams targeting children (and, while we're at it, aid and abet in supporting false copyright claims, as well)


This is because of braindead advertisers that think people will stop buying coca-cola if they hear someone say fuck. YouTube would love to run ads on every single video if they could. Any unmonetized video that they host is literally *costing* them money. But it’s advertisers that pay YouTube to run the ads, YouTube can only run ads on the kinds of videos that the advertisers approve of.


> Any unmonetized video that they host is literally costing them money Correct me if I am wrong but it was my understanding that Youtube will still play ads on these videos but the creators dont get any ad revenue


They do still run ads sometimes, which just compounds the stupidity of it all.


Stupid in the sense that it’s frustrating. But not stupid in YouTube’s part. This just means they get paid and don’t have to pay the creator.


Which is probably the goal for them.


That's so disgusting dude. And they get away with it too. There needs to be an alternative but how does someone even compete with youtube? Nobody has been successful yet


Yes. This is actually my personal belief. Youtube gets to crackdown and now hasn't have to pay ad revenue on a metric fuck ton of videos while they still get to advertise via said videos. I'm not sure why nobody is really bringing this up. This new policy is enforced on every video ever posted to YouTube. Think about how much money youtube is going to save by age restricting literally millions of videos. I personally believe this is a monetary decision being mascerated as a decision to "protect" a very specific age group. Youtubes gross margins aren't exactly great compared to other web based tech companies. Mostly due to the sheer cost of storing an ungodly amount of videos. It's even more suspicious with this policy being enacted right at the start of 2023. Advertisers don't give a fuck about cursing/violence on network TV, but apparently it's now an issue on YouTube. Graphic true crime shows are some of the most popular content on TV and advertisers love it. Advertisers care about how many eyes will see their product, not some youtuber reviewing callisto protocol (basically all callisto videos have been demonitized).


That’s still a monetized video, it’s just not monetized by the creator.


This. Youtube just got to demonitize millions of videos where they will still advertise from, but now don't have to pay the creator. It's an underhanded financial decision being disguised as "protecting" a small age group.




Well shit. I was going to get me some Diet Coke but now that I have read the F word, I cannot but it any more.


Is there any public data around this or is it just proprietary preference or "old wisdom" of ad buyers?


I'm in digital advertising and it's not so much the brands are scared of swearing it's the 27-year-old media planner making 45k a year who doesn't want to get fired from their job. There is an UNLIMITED inventory of ad slots on the internet so the buyers just play it safe—why not. The publishers try to make it as easy as they can to spend money on their sites so that is how these rules happen. Edit: I think it's critical to understand that YouTube gets 500 Hours of video uploaded to YouTube every **minute**. So again that's enough inventory to blow out any brand's budget so the buyers feel zero need to take any chances. Also, I think you do have to understand the position that YouTube is in. It's impossible to review every video with a human so they have the carve-out something that they feel is brand, or media buyer, safe wth simple algos.


To add on to this, swears are the easy thing to pick out. Say an advertiser doesn’t want their ads in an aggressive video. Easiest solution is to catch sweats. It would be much harder to run a sentiment analysis on the transcript.


Sometime I genuinely wonder if it *is* braindead. Older boomers genuinely have brainworms when it comes to profanity. Call a black man every racist term in the book? They're cool with that. Say fuck? TURN THE CHANNEL WOMAN I WON'T LISTEN TO THAT UGLINESS


Stephen Fry pointed out that a few generations ago there were people who would decry swearing as immoral while spooning slave-grown sugar into their tea.


> Older boomers genuinely have brainworms when it comes to profanity. That’s part of the issue too, for some reason companies are always gunning for the 18-49 demographic, or even 18-34, but they obsessively cater to the Boomers. For a company like YouTube it’s doubly stupid to do that because Boomers aren’t using YouTube as a primary form of entertainment. I don’t know about other young Gen-Xers or elder Millenials, but YouTube is my primary streaming source each day. I have no concerns about swearing in videos aimed at me and if Coke started a new ad campaign called “I fuckin’ love Coke!” I might actually be inclined to watch the commercials. Even for people concerned about their kids hearing swears, if the algorithm can detect them and knows that your kid watches nothing but Vlad & Niki videos they should probably be able to do a better job of ensuring the kid just doesn’t see videos that are inappropriate for them.




ProZD has always been one of the best creators on YT. Always short-form video, consistently witty and funny. Glad he's still keeping it going, despite YT not being his bread and butter.


>Always short-form video The man has made half hour long food and board game reviews.


Am I going to watch him try every flavor of a potato chip brand and hang on every rating? You betcha.


S-tier *fanfare plays*


im not there for the ratings. im there for the pain


Right but those reviews are exactly as long as they need to be. 👌🏼


He only recently started doing short skits again for TikTok/Youtube Shorts... *most* of his content is longer reviews, and he also does playthroughs of games with friends on another channel


He used to be big on Vine, so he's no stranger to short form content.


He's also got a really good voice acting career. He was Ratatoskr in GoW: Ragnarok recently and has also been in Pokemon, Fire Emblem, One Piece, and Borderlands.


I had no idea he is Ratatoskr, that makes me so happy!


> Glad he's still keeping it going, despite YT not being his bread and butter. I mean, I also enjoy him, but he can say shit like this *because* it's not his bread and butter. He surely makes a nice chunk from YT, but if it goes away, he's still got Twitch and, most importantly, voice acting.


Dont understand why its so important for the video to not have cursing in the first 15 seconds, what difference does it actually make when the video has cursing in it anyways? Plus the updated violence and gore rules are seriously going to fuck over anything horror related. I like horror stuff :(


They're probably going to enable audio on the pre-click previews.


I think you're right on the money there. They've already added audio but it looks to be muted by default.


Profanity shouldn't be a barrier for ads at all.




I would honestly buy more from Gerber foods if that was their ad campaign


Id buy it and I don’t even have a baby


I thought the recent change was the entire video, based on the auto generated subtitles, whereas before it was the first ~30 seconds or so.


The auto generated subtitles are the reason a lot of videos lost monetization. Because its bad at hearing whats being said, the subtitles can often end up with offensive things that wernt actually said. Youtube counts the auto generated subtitles as part of the video. So at no fault of their own, content creators get demonetized because of youtube's own auto subtitle system. I can see a lot of youtubers hiring on someone specifically to manage the subtitles of their videos just so youtube cant screw them.


More youtube channels need to start adding 15 second intros just so they dont have to worry so much about the anti cursing rule. It will also make more people get the Sponsorblock addon because you can set it to autoskip intros.


> More youtube channels need to start adding 15 second intros lol, this used to be standard, then people got rid of intros because they had to snag people in the first 5-15 seconds if they wanted to advertise the video (and also attract people because all our attention span has gone to shit). The internet is a flat circle.


This is also why YouTube movie trailers have a 5-second trailer going into the trailer. [One example](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giXco2jaZ_4)


I've seen youtubers start to do this, they'll have a 5-10 sec snippet that is a preview for the video you're about to watch, then their intro, then the video. I could see this being the new go to strategy to both hook people and buffer the start.


Meanwhile, I'm watching Christmas videos with my two-year-old daughter, and the videos are constantly being interrupted by 5 minute music videos full of nonstop profanity and nudity. I was pretty shocked and annoyed.


Was it your own profile or did you make one for your kid(s)?


You can manage a profile for your kids


Computer (desktop) I watch videos and for channels (like Wristwatch Revival) can watch almost an entire 45 minute video without any adds. (Or, VERY few.) Bought a new small TV (the old one in the computer room died) with built in FireTV. Setup Youtube channel. . . About 3 minutes of video . . . 30second commercial. Repeat this for all 45 minutes of the primary video. It's just UNUSABLE. (Without subscribing. I guess that's their point, but it's so inconsistent with the online presentation.)


Removing dislikes still was a mistake. But youtube is corporate now and whatever big money companies want, they'll bend over and spread them cheeks