| > Censorship and demonetisation on YouTube seems to be happening to people fairly regularly, and without appeal, via poorly calibrated algorithms Demonetization happens when a video doesn't meet their "advertiser-friendly" policy, but there is an appeal process where you can have a human look at it to determine if the original assessment was wrong [0]. Do you have data to support your claim that their algorithms are "poorly calibrated"? Can you provide some examples of "censorship"? They do have policies that things like graphic content or spam is not permitted and will be removed from the site, but I think that's reasonable. > It seems even the stars of the platform who often share managers and production companies with other stars have difficulty getting in touch with YouTube to resolve issues. YouTube provides email support with a 1-business day response time to all creators [1], and the bigger channels get their own Partner Managers [2]. [0]: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/7083671 [1]: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/3545535?hl=en [2]: https://www.youtube.com/yt/creators/benefit-levels.html?noap... |
>Demonetization happens when a video doesn't meet their "advertiser-friendly" policy, but there is an appeal process where you can have a human look at it to determine if the original assessment was wrong [0]. Do you have data to support your claim that their algorithms are "poorly calibrated"?
It happens all the time when content creators are using content under fair use. Jim Sterling goes over demonetisation with ContentID [1] and latest changes [2] in his videos. I don't know if he have used that email support, but it would be fair to assume that he have tried and gave up.
[0] https://youtu.be/aQVMnW6LGfM?t=222
[1] https://youtu.be/cK8i6aMG9VM?t=62
[2] https://youtu.be/gkfQsQlI8T8?t=96