[beerlord]

The problem is not the videos being there, its the advertisments next to them.

Youtube simply needs to move to a proper gatekeeping model around monetisation, requiring human review and biannual review checks. Start it at 10,000 subscribers to avoid being overwhelmed. Prompt once-off approval for 'viral' trending videos from new channels (even if the advertising money goes completely to Youtube).

The internet is maturing and existing gatekeeping models are too lax. Same thing with games allowed onto Steam. Now any idiot with a phone can upload something - previously you needed a computer and decent knowledge to do that.

Limiting new uploads from new accounts to 720p30 max until they hit 1,000 subs or pay a $100 'starter fee' will save on storage and processing fees.

I don't understand why Youtube (and other tech platforms) sets the barriers to entry so low, then inundate themselves with work. Simply raise the barriers until your human-approval processes can handle the volume.

[hackinthebochs]

What does monetization have to do with any of this, except as a hook to attack youtube and bait advertisers to respond? Monetization is entirely irrelevant to the problematic issues at play.

[beerlord]

All of the means to attack Youtube have been centred on questionable video content being supported with ads from mainstream companies.

Youtube should have wisened up and become a lot more selective of which videos were supplied with ads.

And if running slightly fewer ads is too commecially difficult, then save costs by limiting new uploads to 720p.

[djsumdog]

and really if you don't intent to have ads run on your content, you shouldn't use Youtube. Setup a Peertube instance. YouTube is just too big and content creators that are up and coming should see if they can take control over their content instead of depending on Google, which is just a new version of NBC/CBS/ABC at this point.