Monday, February 27, 2017

YouTube: Ladies in White unsuitable for advertising

Zero dollars
YouTube sent me an email earlier today saying that a video I made about a Ladies in White march in 2010 contained content that was not "advertiser-friendly."
That makes the video ineligible for advertising revenue.
Now it's not as if that seven-year-old video was raking in the dough. It had just 170 views as of this evening and had not earned a single cent.
I don't earn much from YouTube. Most videos I produce cost more to make than they earn. But I think it's ridiculous that women fighting for basic human rights in Cuba, whether you agree with them or not, are considered unfriendly to advertisers.
Holier-than-thou YouTube says content considered unsuitable to advertising includes:

  • Sexually suggestive content, including partial nudity and sexual humor
  • Violence, including display of serious injury and events related to violent extremism
  • Inappropriate language, including harassment, profanity and vulgar language
  • Promotion of drugs and regulated substances, including selling, use and abuse of such items
  • Controversial or sensitive subjects and events, including subjects related to war, political conflicts, natural disasters and tragedies, even if graphic imagery is not shown
My guess is that YouTube classified the Ladies in White video as a controversial event or "political conflict," as described above.

YouTube tells me I can appeal the company's ruling, but I know that's not going to change a thing. I've appealed past YouTube rulings saying that my videos showing tribal nudity - from reporting trips I've taken to the jungles of Ecuador - are unfriendly to advertisers and ineligible for advertising revenue. YouTube has denied my appeals in every case.
It seems to me that the company is "unfriendly" to journalism.
I wonder how YouTube treats videos about political demonstrations and marches in the United States. Is that subject matter also unfriendly to advertisers? And what about political debates in Congress? Are they "unfriendly" to advertisers? Or is YouTube only worried about political conflict and controversy in foreign nations?
Where does YouTube draw the line? And why did the prudish company wait seven years to decide that this particular video taken of women marching in Havana was unsuitable for advertising?
Did a computer make that decision? Or was it just some idiot with a mouse?

Related: YouTube De-Monetization Explained

No comments: