Skip to main content

YouTube Advertisements | Google's problem

Introduction - YouTube's advertising problem

Google, now the owners of YouTube, have been pulling advertisements from some of the more 'controversial' channels of the website, with some of the affected (but still legitimate) creators having to pull out of YouTube completely. Without advertisements running on their channel (and with AdBlock becoming more popular and beneficial for the viewers anyway) they are often unable to monetise and earn from their channel, forcing them to leave.

The reason (from YouTube's side) for doing this is understandable, and with the problem affecting other websites, it isn't just them. However, other websites are handling this better. A company like Google should be able to do even more with their man-power and influence.
I'll be writing about why they've had to do this, what could be better, and what might happen if nothing is changed very soon. Enjoy reading- I hope that this goes forward to the right people.
Now,


YouTube working hard to counter the "YouTube advertising boycot"



YouTube's current problem with advertisements;

www.aristocrat.cash>


As with Twitter and some other big social and sharing websites, there is a new wave of users using the websites to network, plan and share. They take advantage of the huge amount of content and the ease of staying anonymous on the internet to post whatever they'd like, usually doing so without being stopped. They must be stopped.
The two types of people who are affected by YouTube's pulling of advertisements are extremists and satire/fiction/meme users. We focus on these channels, the audiences and the perspective of advertisers in this post.

I'll look at this in writing from both advertisers and publishers points of view- the view of YouTube implied throughout and focused on in the summary.

YouTube's problem - Publisher's point of view

YouTube's problem is that the new rise in extremist videos is happening as meme/edgy culture is becoming more mainstream- both coming up as a new generation of content creators, once done elsewhere now coming out onto the internet. Its understandable that both of them, from a robots points of view, are hard to tell apart, and so the more controversial (but wanting to be seen) channels are easier to find and delete than the people who want to stay more niche and hidden.

So, YouTube can get away with cutting down on the controversial channels being allowed to advertise as there are plenty of clean and safe channels for them to earn from- but the victims here are still real people who want to make a living from YouTube. The victims here are the site owners themselves, losing a share of their profits, with the channels getting a different, harder kind of treatment, losing their jobs. We need to prevent that to fund their futures and hopefully, more intelligent and as older/wiser people, get off the ropes and escape the trap that they're in.
Before I go on, I want to offer a suggestion at this level- along with the drawbacks, pros and counters to the cons and problems I manage to find within them. I'll keep it short.

People can mark blogs, websites, and other things as mature. This doesn't help said creators, and I don't think NSFW can be posted to YouTube anyway, with most of the affected being less 'not safe for work' and more... Questionable.
It would also lead to the main audience- underage people- creating accounts with false information to have access to the videos. I'm older than 18 years old, but I am only one part of their audience- having people pretend to be of age would lead to false statistics, numbers that they (both channel owners and YouTube alike) use to gauge their audience.
Channel owners would get less views while YouTube lower their prices per thousand hits/views on advertisements. It isn't a domino affect, it's a rabbit hole that hurts more as it hurts more.

A solution: using and building on the depth that already exists on the internet, have another checkbox for people hosting the content in question (meme/edgy/etc.)
Advertisers should want this audience- unused, niche, and very impressionable (sometimes ironically). It's a good niche to advertise to, but it puts a very dangerous variable into the mix.

The publishers of these channels have a set audience- I stated that most of them are underage, unused and impressionable. This can be negative if abused and exploited. Helpful if run by legitimate companies (for profits, engagement, relevant exposure) , but very bad if something is done by the less legitimate, more dangerous people.
Note: This isn't meant to be an insult nor negative to the audience mentioned. This isn't the entire audience.

This takes us to the next problem:
Controversial would still be mixed with terrorism; now suggested (to the audiences) alongside each other.
That's a good way to find bad people, but the people who would find them first would be exploitable and might 'jump on the bandwagon' and take in what they're saying.

There would have to be a way to work with legitimate creators for two things

  • (Publisher) The reporting of extremist videos
  • Whilst checking their own videos, report dangerous videos shown in the sidebar and comments.
The reports coming for higher, more trusted channels with more to lose (if this was exploited) can be more trusted. The faster they respond the safer the audiences will be, with the audience now able to go through the channels they like more, giving these channels more of an audience and 'internal strength' between the giants of this niche. (Less 'lost views' from them going out of the niche circle to different kinds of videos, and a sense of accomplishment between creators)

  • (Audience) The idea that actually harassing terrorists is the good and fun thing to do
  • Teach them that it's bad instead of ironic to follow.
Imagine the audiences of H3H3 (Link goes to hit "Quitting YouTube" Video, Filthy Frank and iDubbz others going onto a bad video, who isn't used to our bad humour, and the audience having the chance to talk to them behind a computer screen with absolutely no consequences.
This solves our problem and helps strengthen young minds against what terrorists do/are going to learn to do. The internet is the place for everyone to go- young people are going to grow up here, and the other side are going to move from airport kidnapping to online scouting & recruitment. There needs to be some kind of defence.

Looking at this as paying advertisers

This is going forward to the people who want to advertise to niche audiences, through meme and dark humour channels. Some won't- the audience might not be the best for them, and a company/charity that is fighting against and takes what they joke about seriously, it ends in very big mistakes and very bad exposure. (Viral screenshots that last and show these mistakes everywhere)
As mentioned before- there are plenty of channels that YouTube earn from. They don't need to middleman the earnings on every single channel; they can afford not to as is, but that's as a market that isn't being used. It isn't valuable because it hasn't been grown.
-There needs to be regulation- the content is hosted on their website, laws need to be followed.
It isn't regulated, and might not even be legal, according to advertising laws, if the YouTuber was in hard enough times. There are so many legal issues here that advertising money lost is no longer an issue, as losing out on the money is nothing compared to the legal issues, paperwork, losing of a huge userbase and the website's public image.

Advertisers, as mentioned before, might not want their content shown on some channels. The people who do, though, would contact the now unemployed YouTubers who want to milk their channel before it fully dies.
They have their product shown, shouted out, worn and advertised in some way for a cost that is much lower than before. This goes into the pocket of the channel, with YouTube unable to take a cut.

If there has been any suggestive writing going towards advertisers wanting their product on said channels, I wouldn't be aiming this at all advertisers. Some do, others don't- for some, they should, but they don't. We can't assume they want their content shown on these channels. The audience might not be the best for them, and a company/charity that is fighting against what the videos hosted are joking about. If they match videos to advertisements using keywords/genres, the ironic posting and high amounts of should-be-serious keywords and tags on the videos (descriptions, tags, titles and genres) would be a bad matchup waiting to happen. This is why we need to know when people are doing this- we shouldn't stop them. It's comedy, creativity, fun and that is the way a lot of society is going. They should have the chance to express that and build a career and audience from this. Google should get into it, too.


If their advertisements aren't going out to the right people, they're either paying more for useless exposure, or paying less for overall exposure (with Google having to lower the rates on cost per click or view or the advertisers having to buy more). One side is losing out because there is no way to tell whether or not the channels are extreme or just memes. There's no way to know which side of advertising - good/bad - the advertiser/YouTube is being given.

This section is for the publishers of the advertisements, but YouTube is, once again, at risk. As they host this whole project, the sides affected are of, to a certain extent YouTube's responsibility and they have a part to play in this- like the video publisher's parents in a way. Something has to be done on all things addressed here and more- I won't understand a lot of what goes on behind closed doors and there will be more problems and better solutions for the professionals; I hope though that what I've said here helps. I am not only a fan of some (Since I was very young. A lot-) of those affected, also being a publisher on the Google platform (soon to be moving into YouTube and other Google products) and I appreciate what needs to be done to understand search engines, rankings, and getting to the top as someone who can soon be marketed to and used to advertised with.

I've put my ideas forward throughout, but I would like to go deeper so there is more to work with. More content, more for you to think about and apply to whatever you're doing in real life- hopefully, also, more of a reason for the people I want to read this to pick it up.


My input on YouTube's advertising problems

With a button that can tell YouTube that a channel is going to be controversial, they are safe from being banned. If not, and they're a suspect, their channel is closed as usual. The channels ticked as controversial have to work together with the community that they are so influential and popular in to remove danger and cut the bad from the rest of the website. This is the baseline of the project; a simple button that can open up so many solutions for our current problem and then: future development.

Everyone benefits from this-
Publishers that still want to earn from their channel, turning their creativity, passion and 'new generation' personality into a job that they can grow into- growing with the community that would be so lost without them. This is happening either way, and they will find another website to upload videos onto to fill this gap. They will be paid over on the new website and people will go- leaving and boycotting YouTube afterwards.
This'll make YouTube a playground for the people coming up and finding their hobbies, careers and interests and it'll be creating the new wave of entertainers that will happen anyway. This means that YouTube and Google don't get left in the past as another video publishing website knows, does and learns of what these people want.

The advertisers benefit knowing who they are advertising to- a deeper audience that becomes more usable and valuable- another audience, niche, split sides of advertising that both be used in two very different ways. Two very different people. Both should be used, else it's wasted.
This'll raise the effectiveness and in turn, prices and demand of advertising via this already dominant (minus the CPD, lockers, etc providers) advertising network.

This is talking money, though. This is how people will benefit and be paid from being on YouTube once again instead of selling out, cutting YouTube from the deal, and how the advertising can be even more. Terrorism is a very serious threat- even hackers that would normally mess around with their talent stop playing to stop terrorists.

This audience can also be used to prevent the uprising of the terrorists. The way that Google advertising works can stop them getting paid for it, with minimum pay-out thresholds being too high for them to stay on the site for long enough. Advertisers are reimbursed and both parties, including those who helped report and bring down the videos are effectively helping bring down and fight terrorism- the most important issue of today. Great publicity.

They won't get anything from it. They will stay away from the website and Google will set an example to the other social media/sharing websites to have them stay away from the internet completely- they will be left in the past as YouTube almost was.

The terrorists won't get anything at all from it. They will stay away from the website and as said before (with the moving tide of times and keeping up with the internet), they will be left in the past as we move to the internet and they stay in the dark, scared.
Without being able to network and have their content on the internet, their fight will be made harder. A huge way to move forward is being taken and pressure increases. When they try to do anything extremist/racist/dangerous on the internet, they will be talked to in ways that they won't be used to by people who want to insult and hurt them.

You're now in a power-position.

As extremist videos disappear from YouTube, you can keep small amounts of videos up and wait for them to get used to it- wanting more. A small amount of videos are easier to manage and advertisements are once again niche for these people. Anti-terrorist and help line advertisements can run on the channels and you're putting it forward to 'at risk' people directly. You don't have to be defensive at this point- you can attack. The videos will be ghost-banned, seen only by the people they directly link and bring to the videos. Nobody who is at risk will be brought and if they find them, they will be deep- taking them down from the very inside.
Nowhere is safe for them, except the things put forward in the videos and advertisements- the help out.

As they want more (but more aren't allowed to be made), undercover videos can be made to bring them out of it. They would be desperate to watch, they would be vulnerable and would feel safe, opening them up to what you show to them.


Closing thoughts

I wrote this piece for Google to take from. I would like these ideas, if they help, used or at least taken into consideration as it helps our public image, our fight and our problems- the website, profits, the safety of a generation both on YouTube and real life. It'll set an example to other websites and hopefully, they'll follow suite, with the audiences of the content and visitors of the websites following and being safer, in control, and more prepared for the future. I wrote this piece to do my part in raising awareness and addressing issues that we as consumers, publishers and advertisers are facing. I hope that we go forward from this, with suggestions, feedback and your own thoughts being more important than the post. Let me know what you think, what you would do- what you are going to do, and get the word out.


I've done a piece on choices- our control, the future, time and ours. It's already written, soon to be on the internet. Stay tuned (The follow/subscribe button helps with this, or (if you're oldschool) a bookmark) for posts every Tuesday and Saturday.

Thank you,
Goodbye

-Aristocrat

Comments

Curent Projects; Highlight - UxAC

The Despair Code .pI

The Despair Code .pII