YouTube updates harassment policies to cover insults based on race and sex, implied threats

[midian182]

What just happened? YouTube has a history of being home to toxic behavior, but the platform is updating its harassment policy to try and eliminate bullying and abuse. The new rules will ban content that maliciously insults someone based on their race, gender expression, or sexual orientation.

YouTube vice president Matt Halprin writes that the new rules apply “to everyone, from private individuals, to YouTube creators, to public officials.” The policies cover not only explicit threats, but also those that are veiled and implied. “This includes content simulating violence toward an individual or language suggesting physical violence may occur.”

Any channels that repeatedly “brush up against” YouTube’s updated harassment policy will be suspended from the YouTube Partner Program (YPP), stopping them from earning money on the site. "We may also remove content from channels if they repeatedly harass someone," added Halprin.

The policy change is mostly a response to criticism against YouTube for the way it handled the harassment campaign against journalist Carlos Maza. The Google-owned company refused to remove videos by conservative commentator Steven Crowder, who called him a “lispy queer,” along with other homophobic and racist insults. YouTube said that while Crowder’s actions were “hurtful,” they did not violate its policies. The outrage led to YouTube demonetizing Crowder.

In addition to banning videos that promote hate speech and white supremacist content earlier this year, YouTube also announced it would delete accounts that aren’t “commercially viable.”

“We remain committed to our openness as a platform and to ensuring that spirited debate and a vigorous exchange of ideas continue to thrive here,” said Halprin. “However, we will not tolerate harassment and we believe the steps outlined below will contribute to our mission by making YouTube a better place for anyone to share their story or opinion.”

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/83152-youtube-updates-harassment-policies-cover-insults-based-race.html

 

[captaincranky]

I don't see an issue here. I'm sure that Ms. Mazos is quite confident and secure in the knowledge that he is indeed "fabulous", (Even if somewhat sibilant in his vocal affect, (or perhaps because of it)).

 

[Uncle Al]

Doubtful that it will work long time unless they have accepted the fact that it will cost them some viewership, but since they are just about the only game in town or at least the best known, they might just get away with it. No doubt there will be lots of screams of censorship but their parent company doesn't care so why should they?

 

[captaincranky]

...[ ]... No doubt there will be lots of screams of censorship but their parent company doesn't care so why should they?

Hell, why doesn't Google just go all in, and change the name from "YouTube", to, "OurTube"?

 

[OrumusST]

The author is more concerned about whether this current round of blatant censorship of anything Youtube deems unacceptable will work rather then more corporate censorship of spaces that have become the modern public square. Wow. I still remember when real Journalists were the loudest defenders of free speech even though sometimes it might hurt someone's fee fees. Grow the **** up people. Stop asking companies to be your mommy and daddy and protect you from mean words because before you know it they will take that power and tell you what you can and can not do in other areas of your life that you use their technology. If you can't see this you are blind.

 

[Tantor]

Carlos Maza has a long history of anti-white comments. He's clearly a virulent anti-white racist. https://lovebreedsaccountability.co...ned-and-carlos-maza-was-taught-by-his-mother/

I don't mind his extreme racism. But I do call him for his bigotry. He wants the freedom to attack others, but will not tolerate the reverse. That's a bigot. Somebody who says two different things out of the two sides of his mouth.

 

[gigantor21]

The problem was the inconsistent enforcement of the rules, not the rules themselves.

I'll believe that they are taking this seriously if it is enforced regardless of how popular the offender is. Otherwise it's just more lip service.

 

[captaincranky]

Carlos Maza has a long history of anti-white comments. He's clearly a virulent anti-white racist. https://lovebreedsaccountability.co...ned-and-carlos-maza-was-taught-by-his-mother/

I don't mind his extreme racism. But I do call him for his bigotry. He wants the freedom to attack others, but will not tolerate the reverse. That's a bigot. Somebody who says two different things out of the two sides of his mouth.

Here's the thing minorities have going for them, if he is a "girly man", he can claim all his rhetoric is "reactionary". That's the way minorities can be as racist as they please, but can never be directly accused of being "racist"

Myself, I'd like to organize a "white pride parade" with the full scope of straight white males represented. "Leather clad rockers", white haired men in business suits, lumberjacks, mechanics, basically the whole gamut of us accounted for. The only trouble is, we'd >almost< look like those the Village People are pretending to be.

But then again, we probably wouldn't be able to get a permit for it.

Come to think of it though, the last "White Pride Parade:, was Trump's inauguration, and look how well that turned out