YouTube recently came under fire for its standards, which includes harsher rules and penalties for video creators who don't follow them to a tee. In an announcement, YouTube told these creators that they must be follow them, or they will face demonetization. The main objective of the guidelines is to make it easier for content creators to identify when their videos have been flagged or demonetized. To add to this discussion, YouTube emphasized that it is enforcing this new paradigm to make the website more friendly to advertisers. According to their website, “YouTube reserves the right to not monetize a video, as well as suspend monetization features on channels that repeatedly submit videos violating our policies."
The official YouTube guidelines says videos potentially could be demonetized or flagged if they consist of one of the following: 1.) Sexually suggestive content, including partial nudity and sexual humor, 2.) Violence, including display of serious injury and events related to violent extremism, 3.) Inappropriate language, including harassment, profanity and vulgar language, 4.) Promotion of drugs and regulated substances, including selling, use and abuse of such items, 5.) Controversial or sensitive subjects and events, including subjects related to war, political conflicts, natural disasters and tragedies, even if graphic imagery is not shown.
According to a study by Techno Buffalo writer, Sean P. Aune, YouTube's appeal system might not always operate objectively. This is due to the fact that if a creator's video has controversial material, YouTube's ambiguous guidelines may cause it to be demonetized. He says, “These rules are surprising some content creators under the new enforcement”. Philip DeFranco, a YouTube creator sensation, responds in a video, giving his input on the situation. You can click here to see Philip DeFranco’s video on YouTube: YouTube Responded, But It Gets Even More Confusing...
Do What Big Advertisement Wants or Else
YouTube started out as a small video-sharing platform, but now has transformed into a multi-faceted tool encompassing social media, news, discussion, and expression, as well as a learning resource for various subjects. Nowadays, people depend on the website to follow the news or to expand their knowledge of the world. Due to the considerable impact of YouTube on people's perceptions, it is now considered an accountable source of media.
As a new media communicator, YouTube wields significant influence over the masses, thanks to its diversified functions. According to Freedman, Media power is “The relationships between actors, institutional structures, and contexts that organize the allocation of the symbolic resources necessary to structure our knowledge about, and by extension our capacity to intervene in, the world around us”.
In “Paradigms of Media Power”, an article of Des Freedman’s, he discusses the different paradigms of media power and how it influences society. YouTube has exerted a power paradigm centered around control. This is also called “dominate media” and “it uses its control over symbolic resources to naturalize hegemonic ideas and to confine public discussion”, according to Freedman. When influential individuals or organizations have a significant say in the operations of media outlets and communication channels, they can manipulate the flow of information to advance their own interests. This can result in the dissemination of false or biased information, leading to a public that is poorly informed or misinformed.
YouTube has recently come under scrutiny for using its power to prioritize the interests of its advertisers over those of its content creators and viewers. By exerting control over the type of content that appears on the site, YouTube has created an environment that is more favorable to big companies looking to buy advertising space, rather than fostering an environment that allows individual creators to express themselves freely through their content.
As a result, content creators who seek to contribute to the free flow of information on the internet are now facing negative consequences due to YouTube's guidelines. Many of these creators may experience a loss in profits due to these restrictions, which can hinder their ability to earn a living and create more content.
Des Freedman has argued that the ruling elites have the ability to extend their control over economic resources to media outlets and other cultural apparatuses. In this case, big business advertisers are the elite class that can influence YouTube's decision-making through their financial power.
As YouTube continues to grow as a media platform, it is important for the company to recognize the social impact of its decisions. While YouTube is a private business under Google and has the right to run its operations as it sees fit, it has a responsibility to ensure that creators can express their views freely and without censorship.
In Robert W. McChesney’s scholarly article called “Welcome to Havana, Mr. Corleone: Issues of Media Ownership and control” he argues how the concept of money plays a big role in many media organizations. He discusses myths about the American media way. He says, “The first myth is that the existing profit-driven US media system, for better or worse, is the American Way, and there is nothing we can do about it. The founding fathers crafted the First Amendment to prevent any government interference with the free market.” This quote suggests that in a society, the power to influence the media system and promote honesty ultimately lies with the common people. The original Founding Fathers recognized the importance of a free press, which enables individuals to access information and express their views without censorship. He goes on to say, “Freedom of the press was seen more as a social right belonging to the entire population than as a commercial right belonging to wealthy investors”.
As a media source becomes more powerful, they are more likely to develop certain biases and function like a propaganda machine. In the article, “Media Subservience and Satirical Subservience”, the authors, Dr. Anderson and Dr. Kincaid, discuss the five institutional filters that are used in propaganda. They are: (1) corporate concentration and profit orientation; (2) advertising as the major source of revenue; (3) reliance on governmental and big business sources with presumed credibility; (4) flak as a disciplinary measure for news that oversteps doctrinal bounds; and (5) the dominant ideology tied to unquestioned conventional pieties.
As can be observed, YouTube is subject to most of the filters listed. Firstly, being a private organization, the company's primary focus is profit. Secondly, the vast majority, if not all, of YouTube's profits come from advertisements of other companies. Thirdly, YouTube is now imposing restrictions on content creators who produce videos that conflict with the interests of advertisers. Lastly, YouTube's dominant ideologies are linked to the companies that generate revenue for the site. These factors contribute to a growing perception that YouTube is increasingly becoming a biased propaganda machine that prioritizes the interests of its profit-making partners.
Media power comes in different forms and external forces have a tremendous impact on the decision-making processes. Typically, the outside forces with the greatest influence are those with substantial wealth. In the media industry, where it is crucial for people to have a voice, achieving balance and fairness may prove challenging due to the influence of these external forces.
Sources
Anderson, J.D. and Kincaid, D.L. "Media Subservience and Satirical Subservience."
Freedman, D. (2008). Paradigms of media power: The Enduring Ambiguities of Media Power. Media, Culture & Society, 30(6), 817-833.
Google LLC. (2022). YouTube. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/
McChesney, R. W. (2000). Welcome to Havana, Mr. Corleone: Issues of media ownership and control. Monthly Review, 51(11), 1-11.