YouTube vs WSJ, Latest Ad Policy & Countering Fake Content Creators..

Recently, YouTube announced an important update in order to counter the allegations made through reports issued by The Wall Street Journal. Jack Nicas, a reporter for The WSJ, in his recent article accused YouTube for featuring advertisement​s of multi-billion dollar corporations like Coca Cola, PepsiCo​, Amazon, etc. on videos supposedly anti-semitic or promoting racial discrimination through titles or the uploaded content, which was later found to be true.

You can check out the article later through this link, Click Here !

A sample of which being a video uploaded by a channel named ‘GulagBear’, which included the word ‘N*gger’ in its title. Nicas attached a screenshot of him witnessing a Coca Cola advert on that particular video, which went blatantly viral.

He writes “YouTube is rife with ads from bigger corporations on videos containing socially inappropriate content!”. As a result, WSJ warned YouTube & the companies in question about such occurrences.

In response to this, various advertisers or organizations like Coca Cola, PepsiCo, Walmart, Volkswagen decided to withdraw their association with the platform by blocking their Ads. This caused about a 50–60% decline in YouTube’s Revenue as well as in the income of Content Creators on the platform.

In order to avoid such scenarios henceforth, YouTube decided to block ads for any creator having total channel views below 10,000 which would unable anonymous channels to monetize inappropriate content. Monetization on videos will only be considered valid for creators surpassing the aforementioned threshold of view count.

Considering the big YouTube algorithm modification in January and now this update, there have been a lot of sparks across the community. YouTube Content Creators with major fan following, Felix ‘PewDiePie’ Kjellberg & Ethan ‘h3h3productions’ Klein to consider some, have expressed explicit opinions against this change, making an argument stating that this update might generate more & more obstructions for the emerging talent on the platform. Moreover, this promotes a delusional impression of YouTube, considering a lot of people explaining this update as YouTube’s method of extracting more revenue by focusing on the ‘bigshots’ in the community as ad revenue generated is considerably higher for channels with a larger viewership.

How this update might hit hard on Fake Creators or the anonymous hate across the platform?

Although people are pointing out the phenomenon regarding the barriers for emerging YouTubers, this update might not affect them quite a lot. YouTube’s Ad Revenue is related to the number of clicks/views the respective Ad receives. It also depends on the CPV (Click Per View) Ratio which varies according to the concerned Advertiser. For example, Gaming-based Ads have a much lesser CPV than Automobile Ads.

On an average,a monetized video with 10000 views earns somewhere around 14$ or ₹ 950, which is not exactly an influential amount for a genuine content creators. Besides, if a channel is featuring original & genuine content as per YouTube’s Creators’ Guidelines Policy and has a good like-dislike ratio among the masses, that particular channel is very likely to host a sufficient amount of views which, upon inspection would then be able to earn.

Why would this update be ineffective against the concern?

Basically, this change was intended to help in cases where-

  1. Channels uploaded copied or unoriginal content & promoted clickbait with the sole motive of earning money.
  2. Anonymous people attempt to spread hate across the platform on the basis of racial, religious or ethnic diversities to earn more views for monetary benefits.

or in simple words, to avoid controversies that could harm YouTube. It proposed a threshold of 10000 minimum channel views in order to enable monetization, which is not exactly a gigantic amount for a controversial video to reach.

Besides, fake channels might resort to Plagiarism or Clickbait Techniques for filling their pockets, as this update doesn’t seem to counter the effects of false or exaggerated titles across the platform.

Personally, I think this update, if successful would be able to overcome the flaws or the issues addressed with regard to copied content and could also help reduce the amount of inappropriate content on the platform.

What are your views regarding the update?

Feel free to discuss in the Comments Section !