Youtube should not be allowed to monetize any videos with children in it until they comply with the same conditions that movies that employ child actors have to. That would remove the incentive to make children perform for Youtube videos.
> Youtube should not be allowed to monetize any videos with children in it until they comply with the same conditions that movies that employ child actors have to.
Yes. If Youtube monetization model rewards parents psychologically abusing their children and profits from it. It is cleary that Youtube is at fault.
Google does not want to take responsibility when they host the video, promote the video, and profit from the video. And that creates an incentive to reward bad behaviour and shock content.
I was thinking today how when I was a kid and watched TV at least there was some sort of oversight about what could be broadcast and advertised on TV, especially to children. There is no such thing on youtube or the internet, so people that let their small child loose on a tablet as a babysitter scare the bejeezus out of me.
thats the (ingenuity?) of this whole digital realm
media: youtube/instagram are by far the easiest ways to reach kids with the most effective ways to influence kids/teens being influencers. see: JUUL marketing flavoured nicotine to highschoolers
gaming: loot boxes. comesetics, using kid friendly youtuber/streamers to sell FOMO; and then we get to game passes
it's disgusting how effective its been and how frankly retarded government has been to recognize the laws they made for television arent effective since kids dont watch TV
That's because marketers ruin everything. It's what they do. Anywhere peoples' attention goes - marketers will be there to ruin it.
Mail, radio, television, internet, email, social media... If a bunch of eyes and ears are focused on it you can bet that marketers will be moving to stand between the two and try and get their message seen or heard. The entire point of marketing is to steal your attention from whatever it is that has your attention so that they have your attention. It's insidious at best and most marketing is manipulative (especially emotionally manipulative).
Agreed, I'd say the period just before the internet really became mainstream/gained significant scale was the peak but then I sound like some dusty old hipster. communities are always great when its being built and enjoyed; just before the next, bigger audience jumps on and the mods really have to step in and ruin the original community..
The period just after the Internet became mainstream was still fine, too. Banner ads were slowly infecting websites, but that's about it. But now all the easy money has run dry, so every overt ad is tracking you, every mainstream news platform is dealing you covert ads, and communities (whether old-school forums or modern social media) are being infiltrated by marketers.
This is why I don't let my kid watch YouTube. She gets Hulu Kids, which is high-value, curated, "normal" kids shows. Amazon Prime also has a kids section, I imagine Netflix is the same.
I don't understand why more parents don't restrict their kids to these but let them loose on YouTube instead.
The legal system has a well developed notion of jurisdiction to del with that. A movie shot in California will follow California’s laws on child labor, not New York’s, even if it’s shown there.
It is not consistently applied. Look at bans on obscenity regardless of the legality where or when it was produced. So it seems just as reasonable to say that local ISPs are responsible for blocking locally illegal material.
The videos can be there. YouTube can't make money off of them until they comply with the conditions. Youtube can't host porn videos with 17yr olds despite them not being illegal in many countries.
I mean, it is an American company paying out the ad revenue, and deciding which videos can be monetized or not. So yes, if a Russian wants to get paid advertising money by youtube, they would need to follow American laws.
All that would achieve is the next popular video sharing website not being American. YouTube has a lot of viewers, advertisers, content providers that aren’t Americans.
This approach has a two fold problem. One, what if you are say Canadian or European, does this mean that America now gets to decide what your kids do and don't watch? Secondly, this type of action can lead to retaliation and segmentation of the internet into regional entities where you have an American internet, a Russian Internet, a European Internet etc. We have been trying very hard (not fully succufully, see China) to avoid this.
It is not an approach, it is just the law. An American company has to follow American laws, even when their customers/business partners are non-American
