Date: March 19, 2017
“YouTube’s content restricted mode policy claims to protect children and families, but how is it effecting LGBT content? Who is protecting queer and trans youth?”
“Restricted mode is turned off by default but can be turned on to automatically filter “potentially inappropriate” content. According to Google, which owns YouTube, this is identified by “community flagging, age restrictions, and other signals”.
It is not a new feature, but Ellis said YouTubers were “just starting to realise the extent” of its impact: “it is filtering out a hell of a lot of LGBT content”. She said 40 of her own videos had been hidden.
“I think it’s really important to look at why LGBT content has been deemed as inappropriate. This is something which goes far beyond a mistake that YouTube might have made that they’re going to draw attention to and fix later.”
Tyler Oakley – one of the platform’s most popular personalities, with more than 8m subscribers – had tweeted on Sunday afternoon that he was “perplexed” by the apparent double standard for “LGBTQ+ creators” but was awaiting a response from YouTube, fuelling the #YouTubeIsOverParty hashtag.
Many members of the YouTube community are now questioning whether LGBT content are inherently “sensitive” or “mature”, given inconsistencies in the videos that are restricted. In a statement to the Guardian, a spokesman reiterated that restricted mode was an “optional feature used by a very small subset of users” that, if enabled, meant some videos “that cover subjects like health, politics and sexuality may not appear”.
British YouTuber, NeonFiona, said videos in which she referenced having a girlfriend or her bisexuality had been hidden, but not those that did not specify her partner’s gender. Restricted mode didn’t appear to discriminate by discussion of sex, she added: “It’s just any and all LGBT+ titles being flagged.”
Kind of sounds like they are complaining about people’s ability to choose to have a restricted account…But, likely they’re more concerned about those who have these filters forced upon them…or who are unwittingly being affected by them.
It creates an interesting question, as to where the right to be seen or herd actually exists.
…And as a MAP, with the history I’ve had with YouTube…I am fully sympathetic.
Does the LGBTQ community have a right, to give messages to children and teens?…even when a parent or guardian [or YouTube, itself] wants to prohibit those messages?
What is the queer child’s rights, to know themselves and have queer role models?…to have some sense of normality and belonging?
It also sounds like, maybe, certain groups are exploiting the flagging system…Which is one of the oldest tactics of internet warfare…assemble large groups of people, who are willing to show up at any video for the sole reason of flagging it…It’s all about inhibiting the content creator, and their channel.
I’m not convinced that there is anything new going on here…I just think that the saturation of LGBTQ in everything, has created a false sense that “nothing’s going to stand in their way”, and “the world is on their side”…And we have all these young, LGBTQ people, who’ve grown up with this false sense…And they’re just now discovering, some of the things that many of us knew were rotten about YouTube, ten years ago.
YouTube has always had these problems…And they’ve always been bad about handling them…
…The only real difference, is that the LGBTQ community is something of a social sacred cow…And it’s a well organized, motivated sacred cow…So, the fur could really fly in this fight.
I look on with interest.
As a side note….
…This is amongst the reasons why so many people loathed the coming of ABC, Oprah, etc, to YouTube…It’s why people were angry, when Google bought up YouTube…
YouTube was built off of the alternative, and off of counterculture…
Likely…most people would not believe who the first [and maybe second] wave of YouTube stars even were, especially when compared to the sea of YouTubers out there, today.
…The content and expectations were so different…YouTube was “our” platform…It wasn’t the corporations…It was “ours”…And it was a great equalizer, in terms of advancing your voice…when previously you’d had no other hope of doing such.
Nobody who understood the writing on the wall, wanted Google to buy YouTube…because they’d turn it into a soulless, money grubbing machine…and if it couldn’t make them money, they’d kill it somehow.
Of course…in the process of making money, these corporations don’t care so much about having to burn bridges, with whomever amongst the user base doesn’t fit in with their projected community image…whatever that happens to be, at the moment.
The problem with these corporations [and wealthy people] with a “clean” image…is that they typically don’t play nice with others…and they often just simply move in to take over, and kick the native population out…or at least subdue them.
Often times…the matter of subduing is not so transparent…People don’t always realize it is happening to them.