Do you have an opinion on the whole Youtube/COPPA fiasco?

[mbd39 | 2,020]

In case you don't know, COPPA (Child Online Privacy Protection Act) is an old law designed to protect the online privacy of children under 13. Youtube was recently hit with a huge fine for non-compliance. Starting in 2020, all Youtube videos will either be marked as "intended for children" or not. Those marked as being for children will face all kinds of restrictions such as no targeted ads, no notifications, no user comments, etc.

The scariest part is that content creators can be hit with a 42k dollar fine per video for non-compliance. If the government deems that a video is "for children" and isn't marked as such, you can be fined by the FTC. So content creators can err on the safe side and mark borderline videos as being for children and lose all that ad revenue, or face the possibility of huge fines. I'm sure that many will just quit the platform altogether. Not that the FTC won't start targeting other social media.

This is a nightmare. 2020 is going to be an interesting year for the internet.

 

 

[Reed Rothchild | 9,520]

As someone whose kids want to watch YouTube all the time, 99.9% of the kid content is the hottest garbage I've ever seen.  Good riddance.  Let the worthy survive.

[PineappleLawnchair | 88]

First the government starts taxing internet sales, now this. This year fucking blows man.

[MachineCode | 159]

3 minutes ago, PineappleLawnchair said:

First the government starts taxing internet sales, now this. This year fucking blows man.

Can’t say I take issue with taxing of internet sales. Assholes used to come into a store I worked at try the items and buy them online for the same sale price just with no tax. That loophole allowed online monopolies to decimate many local economies while cheating the public out of tons of tax revenue.

As far as the YouTube thing. Complete and utter bullshit. I get it if the creator marks it as for children and doesn’t comply, but to leave it up to a 3rd party based on opaque and seemingly arbitrary criteria seems like a trap.

[m308gunner | 352]

The government is too large and bloated to deal with any issue (nevermind an internet issue) with subtlety or nuance. 

The bigger issue at hand, though, is the size and proportions of that man's head.

[mbd39 | 2,020]

49 minutes ago, m308gunner said:

The government is too large and bloated to deal with any issue (nevermind an internet issue) with subtlety or nuance. 

The bigger issue at hand, though, is the size and proportions of that man's head.

 

Here's someone else talking about it. Oh wait, same issue about the guy's head

 

[ThePhleo | 2,184]

I was gonna write a long reply that no one would read, so I’m just gonna say the TLDR.

My kids love YouTube. FGTeeV, Blippi, ToyHeroes, RyansWorld, etc.

I don’t like the powers that be tell me what I can and can’t do if it isn’t hurting anyone.

All in all, this is a form of censorship under the guise of “saving the children” and is just an overreach of government.

[CMR | 519]

Sounds like something for people to make FUD videos about.  I don't see how they can fine you for marking a video for adults.  I could understand if they wanted to get you for labeling it as for kids, but then you have Spiderman dry humping Elsa.  Telling someone that something labeled for adults is really for kids is just dumb sounding.

[OptOut | 8,883]

3 hours ago, ThePhleo said:

I was gonna write a long reply that no one would read, so I’m just gonna say the TLDR.

My kids love YouTube. FGTeeV, Blippi, ToyHeroes, RyansWorld, etc.

I don’t like the powers that be tell me what I can and can’t do if it isn’t hurting anyone.

All in all, this is a form of censorship under the guise of “saving the children” and is just an overreach of government.

 

My kids love watching YouTube as well, and I'm perfectly happy to let them! I don't really understand what any of the problems are that the OP mentions, I think a lot of the kids' channels are like sponsored by toy companies which give the content creators free toys for their kids to play with in the videos. Would the COPPA rules prevent this? Also, you said TARGETED ads are not allowed by COPPA, but what about just random ads that run before the videos?

What exactly is the problem again, I'm kinda lost here?

[austin532 | 467]

So Youtube made a mistake but the creators are penalized.

That being said, I marked my channel as "not for kids" but what's to stop a random bot looking at my video of me unboxing a Mario game for example and say "Oh, Mario? That's for kids. This channel is in violation" I definitely can't afford to pay $43,530. I would have to sell my entire collection which I've been collecting for over 20 years now and I'll be damned if that's going to happen. I think I'd rather spend a month in jail then do that.

Why someone would even get fined when they clearly marked their channel as "not for kids" is just plain stupid. That's no different than having a kid walk into a strip club which clearly states outside with multiple signs that it's for adults only and then having the kid's parent sue because the strip club wasn't kid friendly.

I'm not sure if my unboxing videos would be considered "for kids" but I am a little concerned they might get marked as them. I think my only saving grace is I use a very sharp knife to open the games which I guess could be considered a weapon which means it's not kid friendly. Not really sure what I think of all this. I really hope I don't have to shut down my channel as I'm just getting started.

[OptOut | 8,883]

Just start every video with a 30 second tirade of curse words! It could be your new theme song, lol!

[MeganJoanne | 365]

I curse, a lot, in pretty much every video I make because I do a lot in my life off camera. But now all my stuff is unlisted, because I really don't need some crap against it because of my foul mouth and the whole protect the children thing. But I do understand it, there's a lot of really awful horrifying traumatizing shit out there, and not just kids, but no one should see. I do believe there's more warrant for it than say, the video game rating system that all started during the Mortal Kombat era, for those I could understand nowadays games, but back then, that stuff was tame. I used to watch all kinds of horror movies when I was a child, didn't mess me up (I don't think), but there is a big difference between fantasy and much of the very real stuff that is shown now, the kind of stuff kids shouldn't have to see at such a young age, but then sheltering them from every little issue isn't good either. One really has to think about what to allow and expose children to, and nowadays with most of them having their own smart phones and whatnot, they can pretty much look at anything, so even if parents of said kids were to monitor them, quite a bit more challenging now than it was a couple decades ago.

[OptOut | 8,883]

Right now my kids are young, so they only watch YouTube on the TV with supervision. I don't know what it will be like in a few years when they have their own phones or tablets or computers or whatever, but from what I see the YouTube algorithm is pretty good at showing stuff that is kinda the same type of thing rather than wildly different stuff.

Like, my kids are just watching those toy videos and cartoons on YouTube, and it never skips to like a random terrorist video or whatever, just kids stuff nonstop. I think whatever the government, or the parents or YouTube or whoever are afraid of is pretty overblown. I'm not worried at all what my kids watch.

In fact, I've even introduced them to AVGN, although I make sure to teach them not to repeat all the swears, lol!

[austin532 | 467]

"Shredder's my ass and Splinter's my balls."

Maybe this is all just a scare tactic? The fine does seem like someone just made it up. Like how did they come up with that random number? Again though, why should we have to suffer just because they didn't follow the FTC rules?

You can't sensor the internet although it seems like they are really trying to.

[Boosted52405 | 178]

Interesting...as someone who recently got into Pokemon Go pretty heavily, I find myself watching PoGo videos from time to time.  The content creators and their "crews" and what not, are all adults - 99% of the people and crowds in the videos are all adults...

But...given that it's for "Pokemon"...how would they rate those videos?  This is similar to the Mario example posted earlier - this doesn't feel right at all.

[OptOut | 8,883]

Jim Sterling has an excellent, down-to-earth examination of the issue right here:

Long story short, it's mainly a YouTube internal fuck up, probably not gonna be much of a thing for anyone else.

Edited November 20, 2019 by OptOut

[DefaultGen | 5,401]

Not thrilled with a bunch of out of touch old government people trying to subjectively decide what's "for kids". Deciding that something like Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles is for kids is like saying that candy flavored vapes are for kids. I don't think I watch many channels that would be adversely affected but it's not like I'm going to trust the US government or Youtube, fuck 'em.

[Teh_Lurv | 254]

I think people are over-reacting to the $42,000 fine threat, like the government is immediately going to start flinging out fines day 1. The government moves slow and there will probably be an acclimation period to the new rules, so I expect Youtube creators who run afoul of the new rules will receive warnings with fines reserved to repeat offenders. 

 

Edited November 20, 2019 by Teh_Lurv

[RH | 4,903]

I think part of the motivation is because it's starting to get traction in noticing that there are sick people out there that are taking "children's" material and interspersing it with gross, vial and outright vulgar behavior.

It's my understanding that some sickos make these videos in order to trick the algorithms and if kids just Next there way through the video suggestions, they see this stuff that might not violate YouTube policy, but will be highly inappropriate for children.

I didn't watch these videos to see how they shake out but if part of the solution is that you have to mark your videos as "not for kids", then putting the legal onerous on the content creators to basically check a checkbox that makes it more thoroughly and easily filterable for the YouTube algorithms, I'm not going to be to upset about this.

We live in a different time and I think something needs to be done.  That doesn't have to always be spearheaded by the government, but there might be a chance (again, sorry I didn't read up on the topic) that having a strong legal reason to make content creators take an extra step or two to appropriately categorize their material is fine in my book.

Now, if the government is going to turn around and say this flagged as "Not for children" content is child-appropriate, then that's wrong.  There should be a way to say "This is for adults" and then YouTube can use that, with parental settings, to keep those videos away from children's feeds.

[mbd39 | 2,020]

26 minutes ago, RH said:

I think part of the motivation is because it's starting to get traction in noticing that there are sick people out there that are taking "children's" material and interspersing it with gross, vial and outright vulgar behavior.

It's my understanding that some sickos make these videos in order to trick the algorithms and if kids just Next there way through the video suggestions, they see this stuff that might not violate YouTube policy, but will be highly inappropriate for children.

I didn't watch these videos to see how they shake out but if part of the solution is that you have to mark your videos as "not for kids", then putting the legal onerous on the content creators to basically check a checkbox that makes it more thoroughly and easily filterable for the YouTube algorithms, I'm not going to be to upset about this.

We live in a different time and I think something needs to be done.  That doesn't have to always be spearheaded by the government, but there might be a chance (again, sorry I didn't read up on the topic) that having a strong legal reason to make content creators take an extra step or two to appropriately categorize their material is fine in my book.

Now, if the government is going to turn around and say this flagged as "Not for children" content is child-appropriate, then that's wrong.  There should be a way to say "This is for adults" and then YouTube can use that, with parental settings, to keep those videos away from children's feeds.

This move by Youtube has more to do with them knowingly tracking children under 13 who watch videos specifically aimed at young children, which is illegal under COPPA. Nothing to do with Elsagate.

The new rules will just result in a lot of "for children" content creators ditching Youtube. Kids will keep watching Youtube but they'll just watch more adult content because of this law that is supposed to be protecting them. The whole thing is ironic and stupid.

 

 

 

[RH | 4,903]

5 minutes ago, mbd39 said:

This move by Youtube has more to do with them knowingly tracking children under 13 who watch videos specifically aimed at young children, which is illegal under COPPA. Nothing to do with Elsagate.

The new rules will just result in a lot of "for children" content creators ditching Youtube. Kids will keep watching Youtube but they'll just watch more adult content because of this law that is supposed to be protecting them. The whole thing is ironic and stupid.

Well, I get that and I even had the thought that this could very likely mean that kid video content creators might just call it quits and adult content creators just might flag everything as "for adults" and even lower their own personal standards with a net-effect of making YouTube a cesspool. Not everyone, of course, but I could see it making quality to down a bit.

[Estil | 1,264]

I really hope this is being blown all out of proportion, I really do.  I mean to hear some people talk it'll be the end of YouTube as we know it!

[mbd39 | 2,020]

7 minutes ago, RH said:

Well, I get that and I even had the thought that this could very likely mean that kid video content creators might just call it quits and adult content creators just might flag everything as "for adults" and even lower their own personal standards with a net-effect of making YouTube a cesspool. Not everyone, of course, but I could see it making quality to down a bit.

 

This might actually turn out to be a net positive if it means that regular Youtube becomes more for grownups and parents put their kids on Youtube Kids and other platforms.  Maybe Youtube will have to be further broken up into multiple platforms such as Youtube Teen, Youtube Family and Youtube Mature. It will be interesting to see how this all works out.

 

 

 

[mbd39 | 2,020]

1 minute ago, Estil said:

I really hope this is being blown all out of proportion, I really do.  I mean to hear some people talk it'll be the end of YouTube as we know it!

At the very least it will hurt content creators who do aim at kids, as well as borderline channels such as toy reviews and animation where it's more ambiguous whether it's content for kids or not.

 

 

 

 

[Estil | 1,264]

1 hour ago, mbd39 said:

At the very least it will hurt content creators who do aim at kids, as well as borderline channels such as toy reviews and animation where it's more ambiguous whether it's content for kids or not.

As is the case in a lot of these kind of situations, the problem is what exactly constitutes content "aimed at kids" or "aimed at adults" or whatever and who determines which is which?