Now what's going on with YouTube?

[Any Del]

MaStar Media uploaded this today:

 

[Froggy Fool]

God, YouTube has been declining for years, but this just about does it... I don't even know if I'll even continue uploading on my puppetry YT channel at this point. (Granted, I haven't posted on it much in a while, but I may just have to find a new alternative to YT to post content.)

 

[D'Snowth]

I'm really unsure about what direction I want to take because of this as well.

Yes there are alternatives to YouTube, but many of them have flaws and limitations that YouTube has long done away with, such as time limits, as well as file size limits . . . although it's uncommon, some of my content is over 15-minutes long, and since 2015, my content is also in HD, and can range anywhere from several hundred MBs to a few GBs, so there's a good possibility that certain content of mine won't be supported on certain alternatives. Also, certain other alternatives like Dailymotion are even more invasive with commercials and such.

I suppose I could go the James Rolfe or Doug Walker route and launch my own website to host my content, but I'd have to pay for a domain, pay for web space, pay for bandwidth, and I'd still have find somewhere to upload my content to embed on the website . . . I suppose I could use Google Drive, but you only get so much storage space.

I think the only thing I can do at this point is just admit defeat . . . I mean, I know I've done thing many times before, but I mean for realsies this time: I've dealt with YouTube screwing me over and stunting the growth of my channel for too many years - if I tag my content as "made for kids" to avoid a $42,000 fine per video otherwise, what am I really losing anyway? Comments? Viewers and subs hardly ever comment on my videos anymore anyway. End screens? I suppose that's not really a big deal, even though I've been working on my end screens in the last year. My subscribers receiving notifications about new uploads and such? YouTube itself has been quietly pruning our subscribers and disabling notifications anyway. My videos not being recommended? I'm not even sure they already are anyway.

The only silver lining is apparently a lot of YouTubers are actually reaching out to the government about this, addressing the issues and how it affects them, and supposedly, the legal experts and lawmakers are listening, and may consider how they can change things to have less of a negative impact on us . . . whether or not that actually happens remains to be seen.

 

[LittleJerry92]

Far as g drive goes, 100gb isn’t too bad. It’s only 1.99 a month.

 

[Any Del]

I suppose I could use Google Drive, but you only get so much storage space.

Why not use Google Photos? The videos that were taken down on my YouTube channel I uploaded them on Photos and they're still there by the way. Why not use Photos as an alternative?

 

[Blue Frackle]

So now I realize that Jerry and Snowth were talking about two different things...

The COPPA thing is so farfetched and incomprehensible that I'd be surprised if it passes; it'd be like going backwards in time. I'm trying to understand it: what I'm gathering is YouTube was data mining what children watched to illegally aim ads at them, so nothing that appeals to children is allowed on YouTube anymore?... wut? Why can't YouTube just stop data mining children or placing ads on said videos? I'm so confused.

 

[D'Snowth]

COPPA has been around for countless years; YouTube was in violation of it by data mining the activity of users thirteen and under.

It's not that videos that appeal to children aren't allowed on YouTube anymore, it's that videos that are labeled as kid-friendly will no longer possess many basic functions and features that YouTubers use to engage their audiences, such as comments, notifications, end screens, their videos being able to be added to playlists, or recommended across YouTube (the latter, said kid-friendly videos will now only be recommended alongside other kid-friendly videos), and if your content is monetized, you can't have personalized ads on your videos anymore, the ads will have be set by YouTube itself, which may or may not pertain to your content, thus causing a dip in revenue.

If you try to beat the system by labeling your videos are not being kid-friendly, but their computerized system determines that it is kid-friendly (say you make a raunchy YouTube Poop using clips from kids shows and cartoons), you'll be fined over $42,000 per video for mislabeling them.

 

[LittleJerry92]

So at this point, should I just start labeling some of my YouTube poop videos with random Thomas footage over raunchy audio sources as kid friendly in spite of the fact that there are F bombs and sexual references, etc?

 

[Blue Frackle]

Is this just an effort to keep kids away from YT in general?

So at this point, should I just start labeling some of my YouTube poop videos with random Thomas footage over raunchy audio sources as kid friendly in spite of the fact that there are F bombs and sexual references, etc?

This is the exact reason why this is so bizarre and I hope it doesn't pass.

 

[D'Snowth]

Well, supposedly, many YouTubers and their lawyers are reaching out to the FTC about all of this, and how it affects them . . . and supposedly, the FTC is listening, and trying to looking into how they can work this out in ways where it's not so inconvenient for those of us caught up in the middle.