A YouTube channel featuring recreational fishing videos has been monetized by the video-sharing giant over alleged “animal abuse” content.
The Australian-based content creator for Guido’s Fishing Adventures said his channel had been shut down for a month and was awaiting a response from Google-owned YouTube.
“(YouTube’s notice) says that I need to make adjustments to my content, and this clearly accompanies animal abuse,” he said on his latest YouTube video. “You can actually read there that what I’m doing is okay because I’m not abusing animals for shock, or whatever they are against—which is fair enough, I’m also against it— I’m fishing right now.”
Guido said he received an email from YouTube informing him that a “significant portion” of his content was against their policies. However, he noted that he had been uploading similar videos for a long time.
“I also received my 100,000-membership plaque in the mail,” he said, in reference to the Silver Creator Award, which is distributed to YouTube channels with over 100,000 subscribers.
“I asked for it two weeks ago, and they check your content, and they check your channel before sending it – and they did – and they sent it to me and said everything was good.”
“I am confused; I don’t know what is happening,” he said. “It is a big problem for me because nowadays the bulk of my income comes from YouTube. And I am not being paid anything. “
YouTube has yet to respond to inquiries from Guido and The Epoch Times.
Rob Nichols, associate professor of regulation and governance at the University of New South Wales, described YouTube’s monetization program as an “intermediate step” in its content moderation process.
“It is likely that this content was monetized as part of artificial intelligence analysis,” he told The Epoch Times. “There is, in part, a parallel with the take-down of a chess channel on YouTube at the beginning of the year. In that case, expressions like ‘Brutal attack by White on Black’ were a description of a chess match, not hatred of that race. What machine analysis found.
“All social media, but especially for videos, have a balance between allowing potentially harmful content to be available for distribution and removal,” he said, noting that YouTube reversed instances of accidental monetization. Was.
In recent years, YouTube’s content moderation has received criticism from conservative-leaning media channels, including OAN and Sky News Australia, complaining that its policies are inconsistently implemented.
In August, YouTube suspended Sky News’ channel for a week for allegedly posting “COVID-19 misinformation” while at the same time issuing a “first strike” against the 24-hour news channel—its own A caveat under the three strike policy.
Sky News CEO Paul Whitaker said the video-sharing giant’s review policies lacked transparency and were “unable to comply”.
“Unlike other publishers’ policies, YouTube’s process for reviewing and removing content lacks transparency and a clearly articulated process that gives channel operators the opportunity to address concerns or challenge assessments before suspension occurs.” gives,” he said.
“With no transparency provided, Sky News took a proactive approach to removing a batch of all videos published during 2020 from the online platform to ensure compliance with YouTube’s arbitrary editorial guidelines,” Whitaker said.
He also noted that this was not an admission of failure to comply with YouTube’s rules, but “merely an attempt to navigate opaque policies.”
This News Originally From – The Epoch Times