I’ve always wondered: When companies decide they need to look good for investors, it means to be clean and non-controversial. Why is this? Are investors old and out of touch or something?
They have to look good to advertisers. And the megacorps of the world need to be sure their brands are not associated with anything “controversial” so they can appeal to as many Americans as possible.
I believe the consensus is that the most profitable target market are children and young teens.
Which makes no sense! I know they don’t have any bills, but they also have no income either! Is the tooth fairy and grandparents birthday money REALLY funding the ecconomy???
Oh…no, that actually makes sense.
I suspect this is satire but in case its not. Its not the children themselves that are paying, its the parent that pays for whatever their critters demand.
18-34. They have a little money from their first jobs, and they tend to spend it.
Basically they want to reach as wide as possible, so they tend to clear out or lock any controversy content behind something, even to the point of being ball-less and/or pro-fascism.
Oh, they love controversial content. If they can put ads on it. Engagement and hatewatching are great for an ad business.
It just can’t be formatted in a way advertisers want to avoid or regulators want to regulate. The result leads to very weird, very toxic patterns of content and nobody wants to fix it (or has any particularly effective ideas about how).
Are investors old and out of touch or something?
Yes.
Investors tend to be extemely risk averse, so the slightest little thing might scare them off. Even if they decide to take the chance anyway, they still want it to be as clean as possible, to minimizing the risk.
Even the slightest improvement may increase the investment by millions, or even billions, of dollars, so it’s worth the trouble.
First of all, who’s your AnR? A mountain climber that plays and electric gitarr? But eh don’t know the meaning of dope when he’s looking for suit 'n tie rap that cleaner than a bar of soap.
I feel like The Onion should host their own PeerTube instance, just for the sake of using an incredibly cheeky domain name like ifuckinghatewatching.video or something cooler like onion.media or something
why not just tetrahedron.global?
They should also have a Tor domain too, imagine cuandi2nfh81i4juqknsk18the.onion or something lol
Infowars.video xD
Sony is finally going to release me!? Freedom!!!
To be fair there is quite a bit of swearing in the video.
I can see how they wouldn’t want it plastered on other websites that wouldn’t warn about the foul language.
Yeah… understandable. What really grinds my gears is that the whole world has to submit to these very American rules. The rest of the world doesn’t believe you need to be an adult for swear words or a nipple, but we have to accept it.
There are still cultural norms where you live. Probably even some that would be offensive in your country but not in the United States.
Not denying that. That’s kind of my point actually… It would be nice if Youtube, Xitter and co had to accept the law and cultural norms in my country. No ridiculously censored swearing, non-sexual nudity normalized, no Nazi salutes…
Well…the title… And the content…
Yeah, because “naughty” language is SO harmful to anyone under 18 and can’t be freely found fucking everywhere that’s not patrolled by conservative nincompoops 🙄
Well, I’d say “you get a warning and need to click past it once” is probably the right set of guardrails there, which is to say “as robust as a little bit of tape”.
The real disincentives on Google services are downstream, where that impacts your placement to receive ads and monetize. I don’t know how much The Onion cares about that, I’m guessing Youtube ads aren’t a massive slice of their revenue pie, but for everybody else it’s a significant carrot and stick thing to keep access to that sweet, sweet midroll ad money.
“you get a warning and need to click past it once” is probably the right set of guardrails there
You also have to sign in…
Sorry, I may be too old to know this off the top of my head. They won’t let you watch a “not for kids” embed unless you’re logged in? Or is that for a separate “sensitive content” flag?
I think it’s separate, assigned automatically by scanning the subtitles and imagery, probably.
The fuck it is!
nincompoops
This, alone, deserves an updoot lol one of the best, most destructive insults imo
Faŝistoj
Tfw I don’t have to know Esperanto
You sure it’s YouTube that does this or the onion guys set a flag because of a profanity in the title?
Either way, it’s definitely YouTube that mandates annoying extra clicks to their frontend littered with ads and tracking cookies every time a video is age gated, which is the most infuriating part of this by far.
