The YouTube, COPPA, and FTC Situation

[indigoasis]

Hello everyone. I would just like to take the time to help spread awareness about something that you may or may not have heard about. I feel that this video by Garrett Williamson does a great job of explaining the situation, so if you have the time, please watch it. If you'd rather not watch it, I'll do my best to briefly explain.

YouTube was caught violating the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act and was fined by the FTC. Measures are being taken in order to comply with it. However, the way they're going about it will negatively affect all of the creators on the platform. Videos will either have to be marked 'made for kids' or 'not made for kids.' Marking a video as the former option will drastically reduce any revenue or income that a creator could have made, as well as essentially unlisting the video from searches, limiting advertisements that might show up, lowering views, etc. Incorrectly marking a video (should it be deemed marked incorrectly by everyone's favorite machine, the algorithm) may make a creator liable to be fined up to $42,530 per video by the FTC.

My biggest worry about this whole situation is the amount of people it's going to affect, namely the content creators. Many people could essentially be put out of a job that they enjoy, and viewers may have to migrate to other platforms, such as... *shudder* television.

It's difficult for me to explain, but I encourage everyone reading to look into this and help make a difference. There is a change.org petition that is available to sign, and the description of it explains this whole situation way better than I ever could. In the spoiler tab below is a twitter post by change.org that also has a link to the petition.

Spoiler

https://twitter.com/Change/status/1196892177177219074

I hope that things turn out okay. I don't want all of the Three Houses and Fire Emblem memes on YouTube to disappear.

Thank you for your time. Please feel free to share your thoughts on the situation.

Edited November 20, 2019 by indigoasis

[Nym]

4 minutes ago, indigoasis said:

Marking a video as the latter option will drastically reduce any revenue or income that a creator could have made

I've seen the issue but I thought it was the contrary. The videos marked for kids were the one with the less revenue.

[eclipse]

My thoughts is that this is in the wrong subforum.  And since I have no plans on making YouTube my job, I don't really care, as long as I can find what I want.

[Major]

20 minutes ago, Nym said:

I've seen the issue but I thought it was the contrary. The videos marked for kids were the one with the less revenue.

I've seen it as well, but the thing is the specifics they go by (as well as dumb YouTube bot just flubbing) as far as something in the "for kids" category might make things a lot trickier.

One example, is something like "bright and colorful graphics", 

-- I might be dumb, but I think some of these choices made as a content creator aren't to market towards children, but to appeal to anyone's eye. Not just kids like visually appealing and interesting things...so you could basically still get fined for "mislabeling"....even though you didn't. I swear in a lot of my stuff and I'm also not monetized so I doubt I'd even be hit here but idk, still bothers me

[Sid Starkiller]

10 minutes ago, eclipse said:

And since I have no plans on making YouTube my job, I don't really care, as long as I can find what I want.

And suppose the people that make the content you like rely on their ad revenue to make more videos, and shut down their channels. What then?

I don't make content, either, but I'm still really worried for the people I subscribe to.

[eclipse]

5 minutes ago, Sid Starkiller said:

And suppose the people that make the content you like rely on their ad revenue to make more videos, and shut down their channels. What then?

I don't make content, either, but I'm still really worried for the people I subscribe to.

You assume that I watch those types of videos.  I don't.  The stuff I do watch are from people who I'm 99% certain are uploading without seeing a cent of revenue.

And this is intentional.

[Ertrick36]

YouTube is owned by Google, and Google is a corporation, so it won't listen to people unless they start losing a significant amount of their business.  All the petitions and public outcry in the world won't change their minds as long as they don't lose a cent of their annual profits.

The solution for anyone who wants to make a career out of making internet videos is outsourcing.  Go to Facebook, Twitch, Reddit, Tumblr, Twitter... whatever websites you can share your videos, content creators need to look to those places to find more fans, because Google doesn't want the little guy who can't afford to make videos every day of the week to become successful.  For funding, you'll need to depend on the good will of your viewers - set up a Patreon and hope people on Twitch will give you subscriptions and bits.  And make sure people know it's an option (don't be a dick about it, of course, tell them to only pay if they want to and can afford it) and offer benefits for those who donate or subscribe.  One Twitch streamer I know lets people put music through an automated queue system that'll play live on stream if they donate $5 or more (his name is Simpleflips, and he's a funny speedrunner).

Not only is this a better way of becoming successful as a content creator, but you also get to give YouTube the middle finger by showing them that you can be successful without their help.  In my eyes, it's a win-win.  Of course, it'll be difficult to become successful regardless of what route you take, but Google will only make it harder and harder for people to become famous and earn enough money on YouTube to make a living out of it, and becoming adaptable means you'll always be able to find a way to ride out any storm.  If YouTube were to go down in a mighty crash somehow, people who built their entire careers off of YouTube would be devastated (some like Pewdiepie might be okay because name recognition will get them through any crisis, but people in the hundred-thousand or 1 million subscriber range would have a hard time if they depended entirely on YouTube), but those who expanded their reach to other platforms would be okay (they would be hurt, obviously, but they'd be able to recoup).

I'm sorry to be contrarian here, but I'm just trying to be pragmatic, and I'm also very cynical about corporations.  Google has not given me much reason to not doubt their intentions, and their continual ass-backwards policy making and over-reliance on bad systems with YouTube doesn't help with this.  They care about their bottom line, that's why they made this change.  They couldn't give less of a damn that disgusting middle-aged men were ogling at little girls and sharing links to child pornography on their platform, they just care that the government is slapping them with fines and taking away from their marginal profits.  So I don't see why they'd suddenly care if, like, a thousand or so content creators they clearly don't give to shits about signed a petition and mailed it to them.  The only way to get them to change is if a million or so people suddenly boycotted the service, or if someone like Pewdiepie boycotted the service (which I don't think he will, as much as he grandstands about being a representative of the will of your average YouTuber).

[Nym]

1 hour ago, eclipse said:

My thoughts is that this is in the wrong subforum.

Why? It isn't this a serious issue? Not a national crisis kind of issue but still.

2 hours ago, eclipse said:

And since I have no plans on making YouTube my job, I don't really care, as long as I can find what I want.

You realize this is more then Youtube, right? They have Youtube under their scope right now, but under their own vague statement of what is considered kid friendly, they could target a lot of sites including this very forum since video games are what they consider appealing to kids.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

As more videos addressing this issue come up in our sub boxes from various content creators, the way I see it, contacting the FTC and even signing the damned petition is probably going to go a long way compared to the latest Youtube-pocalypse situation. These are folks whose job it is to listen to people, unlike a corporate entity like Google that only ever hires people with the best algorithm 

Now I better become one of these content creators before somebody steals my idea of a thumbnail titled "Youtube THANOS SNAPS Family-Friendly Content!"

[Roflolxp54]

Some of my thoughts:

COPPA can end up violating the First Amendment (freedom of expression). There are many videos (such as animations created for the purpose of satire or parody) posted online about controversial topics, including American law and regulations. The First Amendment does NOT allow the curtailing of discussion/criticism of the American government and its policies outside of wartime. This could become a slippery slope that could affect other American video sharing sites or other sites (such as here) or possibly lead into situations similar to the passing of Article 13 that took place in the European Union months ago or the Chinese government impeding the spreading and discussion of the Hong Kong protests.

Language used in COPPA is vague which makes it hard for content creators to decide whether or not their videos are "made for kids". I will be laughing if a hentai video gets uploaded onto YouTube and gets marked "made for kids" due to its use of animated characters and colorful graphics, especially since Google still relies on faulty algorithms.

With the way YouTube is reacting to COPPA being enforced, Google seems to be bowing to the whims of lazy/careless/negligent parents who don't monitor what their kids watch. Heck, I'm certain that there are many American parents who knowingly create accounts on the main YouTube site for their underaged children to use even knowing that the main YouTube site is explicitly intended for users aged 13 and older. In other words, Google is excusing poor parenting and is using the content creators as scapegoats for not babysitting their kids well.

COPPA seems to be trying to solve a symptom of the problem rather than try to solve the root of the problem (companies collecting, using, and selling private information).

Edited November 20, 2019 by Roflolxp54

[Espurrhoodie]

1 hour ago, Roflolxp54 said:

Language used in COPPA is vague which makes it hard for content creators to decide whether or not their videos are "made for kids". I will be laughing if a hentai video gets uploaded onto YouTube and gets marked "made for kids" due to its use of animated characters and colorful graphics, especially since Google still relies on faulty algorithms.

I was actually joking earlier about them looking at, say, Panty and Stocking and calling that kid-friendly.

Which it isn't. I haven't seen it yet, but it really isn't.

[Brave Lance]

https://twitter.com/egoraptor/status/1196960328111644675?s=12

This just about clears everything up. Things probably aren’t 100% okay for everyone but the situation isn’t nearly as bad as it’s been made out to be.

[indigoasis]

5 hours ago, Nym said:

I've seen the issue but I thought it was the contrary. The videos marked for kids were the one with the less revenue.

Oof, I meant the former. Thank you for catching that.

3 hours ago, Nym said:

Why? It isn't this a serious issue? Not a national crisis kind of issue but still.

I initially put this in General, if I recall correctly. I think the fact that this situation could affect the entire internet (including this website, most likely) is worth making it a serious discussion. 

2 hours ago, Roflolxp54 said:

With the way YouTube is reacting to COPPA being enforced, Google seems to be bowing to the whims of lazy/careless/negligent parents who don't monitor what their kids watch. Heck, I'm certain that there are many American parents who knowingly create accounts on the main YouTube site for their underaged children to use even knowing that the main YouTube site is explicitly intended for users aged 13 and older. In other words, Google is excusing poor parenting and is using the content creators as scapegoats for not babysitting their kids well.

YouTube Kids was created for a reason, and yet both parties (parents and YouTube themselves) seem to disregard it's existence entirely in favor of what is (understandably) considered the easier version to use, that being, of course, YouTube Main.

[eclipse]

3 hours ago, Nym said:

Why? It isn't this a serious issue? Not a national crisis kind of issue but still.

I moved the topic here.  It was elsewhere before.

3 hours ago, Nym said:

You realize this is more then Youtube, right? They have Youtube under their scope right now, but under their own vague statement of what is considered kid friendly, they could target a lot of sites including this very forum since video games are what they consider appealing to kids.

That's quite a reach.  YouTube has its own issues with "kid's content".

3 hours ago, Roflolxp54 said:

Some of my thoughts:

COPPA can end up violating the First Amendment (freedom of expression). There are many videos (such as animations created for the purpose of satire or parody) posted online about controversial topics, including American law and regulations. The First Amendment does NOT allow the curtailing of discussion/criticism of the American government and its policies outside of wartime. This could become a slippery slope that could affect other American video sharing sites or other sites (such as here) or possibly lead into situations similar to the passing of Article 13 that took place in the European Union months ago or the Chinese government impeding the spreading and discussion of the Hong Kong protests.

I think that's for the government only.  Private entities can do as they wish.  Otherwise, a lot of private sites would be in trouble for their own rules.  I mean, if you want to post a pro-Trump comment to a left-leaning site, and said comment gets deleted, I don't think that's a violation of the First Amendment.

[Roflolxp54]

32 minutes ago, eclipse said:

I think that's for the government only.  Private entities can do as they wish.  Otherwise, a lot of private sites would be in trouble for their own rules.  I mean, if you want to post a pro-Trump comment to a left-leaning site, and said comment gets deleted, I don't think that's a violation of the First Amendment.

It's more in the sense in how COPPA can be abused. And COPPA is a federal policy, implying that the federal government enacted it and is enforcing it via the FTC.

Though really, the root of the entire issue is private companies collecting and selling private data, including those from children below legal age. The problem mainly became apparent with parents not wanting to parent and are just giving their kids iPads to use as their personal babysitters.

Edited November 20, 2019 by Roflolxp54

[Azure the Scale Tipper]

11 hours ago, Roflolxp54 said:

Though really, the root of the entire issue is private companies collecting and selling private data, including those from children below legal age. The problem mainly became apparent with parents not wanting to parent and are just giving their kids iPads to use as their personal babysitters.

Does that count as parental neglect?

[Espurrhoodie]

11 minutes ago, Azure, Roundabouted Out said:

Does that count as parental neglect?

Personally, I feel like it should.

Seriously, spend time with your kids.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

If Youtube had been wise enough to never run targeted ads on content aimed at kids, there wouldn't have been so many channels and creators staking a career on Youtube as a platform doing just that. Their careers may be over with a stark loss in revenue and that sucks to be them. But the assertion that channels not made for kids are probably safe feels like a fair one to make so long as the situation doesn't change. And if Youtube had already reached a settlement and pay out of 170 million I assume it won't. The only grey area I can see might be entertainment channels like Arlo who happen to use a muppet mascot and to the average observer may obviously seem like a kids channel when it's not, but word on the web is that any channels that are at risk have already been contacted by Youtube about the changes.

Also, if Youtube hadn't been so un-communicative in the past about how content ought to be curated, creators probably wouldn't be sweating bullets at news like this. I don't envy a career path whose sustainability lives or dies by a set of ever-changing algorithms.

[Silver-Haired Maiden]

This is not just a Youtube thing. This is a US law that they're debating, it will apply to every website in the US, they're just starting with Youtube. This is serious and this is bad. Very, very bad.

[Magical Glace]

The big issue as far as I can see is the FTC's definition of "Child friendly" is far too vague to be properly followed for a lot of creators.

It doesn't matter if your intended audience isn't children.  If the FTC says your video is "child friendly," and you didn't mark it as such, you get fined $42k even if children aren't your intended audience.  With the guidelines we were given even something as simple as color is considered "child friendly."  Honestly, to me it seems like "Any video a child might click is child friendly" and at that point it seems like just... any video at all.  Children aren't robots, they have varied interests especially when the range is as wide as 0-13.  The FTC by that logic can fine just about anyone they want, because the rules are vague enough that it's impossible for content creators to really tell what they mean by "child friendly."  There needs to be clear, strictly defined rules on what content is aimed at children.  

There should also be some kind of safe option for creators who are unsure.  Normally, that would just be marking videos as not aimed at children and going on with their day, but that's not the case here.  Some kind of "please submit my video for manual FTC review before it goes live, I'm not intentionally targetting children but I don't want to be fined $42k for doing so under your definition by accident."  Or perhaps "This video is not intentionally aimed at children, but do not collect personal data from viewers in case children watch it." Currently youtube's advice on navigating this vague binary is "consult a lawyer," which is expensive.

Hopefully, either the FTC hears the complaints in the comment period and changes its course to something more sane (best case scenario), or the rules are sued and deemed too vague or something similar.  

Also, I'm worried about an old school run account of mine I used for assignments I can't access anymore... the link to a video on it just gives me "video unavailable" with zero elaboration but I worry that I could be fined for it anyway since it may not be properly deleted... I can't log into an account associated from a place I graduated from... I don't know if the account was completely nixed when I graduated or what.  It has me very antsy.

[eclipse]

On 11/19/2019 at 7:39 PM, Roflolxp54 said:

It's more in the sense in how COPPA can be abused. And COPPA is a federal policy, implying that the federal government enacted it and is enforcing it via the FTC.

Though really, the root of the entire issue is private companies collecting and selling private data, including those from children below legal age. The problem mainly became apparent with parents not wanting to parent and are just giving their kids iPads to use as their personal babysitters.

And targeted advertising of kids, too.  Which I'll explain below.

6 hours ago, Silver-Haired Maiden said:

This is not just a Youtube thing. This is a US law that they're debating, it will apply to every website in the US, they're just starting with Youtube. This is serious and this is bad. Very, very bad.

No, this is the lesser of two evils.

Here's how a bunch of data points can identify various traits about someone.  Which means given those points, "number 1032" (an example of a record, probably not how it's actually stored) can be identified to a fair degree.  These are the effects of advertising on kids,

In short, take an "anonymous record", put together a bunch of data points, and aim it at an audience that's not legally able to consent to it.

[Dragoncat]

So, somebody explain something to me. Does this only affect people who have their channels monetized?

I also second everyone who would laugh if a hentai video gets dubbed "for kids".

And yeah the main issue here is that Little Johnny can see an ad for Hotwheels while watching Happy Car Adventure, and click on it, and is able to buy Hotwheels with his parents credit card information saved on the device. Little Johnny's parents did not authorize the purchase of those Hotwheels. So the aim here is to not have ads on kids videos to avoid this. BUT if Happy Car Adventure thrives on ad revenue then it hurts the creators of it.

However, I use adblock on youtube. I hate seeing ads in videos. So.

Edited November 21, 2019 by Dragoncat

[Johann]

20 minutes ago, Dragoncat said:

So, somebody explain something to me. Does this only affect people who have their channels monetized?

Just monetized channels. By the FTC's own language, a channel can use their viewer metrics as a defense against a claim against them, at least. For instance, if your channel's viewership is overwhelmingly adult aged, then you'd be ok.

20 minutes ago, Dragoncat said:

And yeah the main issue here is that Little Johnny can see an ad for Hotwheels while watching Happy Car Adventure, and click on it, and is able to buy Hotwheels with his parents credit card information saved on the device. Little Johnny's parents did not authorize the purchase of those Hotwheels. So the aim here is to not have ads on kids videos to avoid this. BUT if Happy Car Adventure thrives on ad revenue then it hurts the creators of it.

The problem was not so much showing adds to kids about stuff marketed to them, but more about gathering data on what kids watch for ad purposes, and autoplaying/suggesting videos from "appropriate" stuff into the extremely bizarre (Spiderman + pregnant Elsa videos) and generally content that isn't suitable for children (such as the infamous Logan Paul suicide video). The bottom line is that Youtube had a responsibility to make its platform a safe place for children, or put up the proper barriers to prevent children from accessing it and being exploited. A pretty tall order and they failed miserably, and Youtube is shifting the burden of compliance onto content creators.

[indigoasis]

On 11/20/2019 at 11:54 AM, Azure, Roundabouted Out said:

Does that count as parental neglect?

If they aren't being properly supervised, then it could very well count.

19 hours ago, Glaceon Mage said:

Also, I'm worried about an old school run account of mine I used for assignments I can't access anymore... the link to a video on it just gives me "video unavailable" with zero elaboration but I worry that I could be fined for it anyway since it may not be properly deleted... I can't log into an account associated from a place I graduated from... I don't know if the account was completely nixed when I graduated or what.  It has me very antsy.

As @Johann mentioned, it only affects monetized channels, so unless you were making money off of that video, you should be fine. Also, if you're the only one with a link to the video and it's unavailable to view, I doubt that the FTC, if anyone, will find it or see it at all. I hope that eases your worries a bit.

[Magical Glace]

3 hours ago, indigoasis said:

If they aren't being properly supervised, then it could very well count.

As @Johann mentioned, it only affects monetized channels, so unless you were making money off of that video, you should be fine. Also, if you're the only one with a link to the video and it's unavailable to view, I doubt that the FTC, if anyone, will find it or see it at all. I hope that eases your worries a bit.

I've actually seen some conflicting information on the monetization thing.  Some people have said it only effects monetized because otherwise the creator doesn't benefit from the data, while others said unmonetized and demonetized accounts are still affected because Youtube still automatically gathers data on those videos.  

 

Edited November 22, 2019 by Glaceon Mage