MGTOW Channels Demonetized on YouTube

[Islam Imamate]

Source?

This was a big story last year. The advertisers also boycotted to try to renegotiate the terms of their agreement with Google to make them more favorable and used the pretense of their ads being associated with so called extremist context to do so. Nonetheless we're talking about what are essentially market forces here since its an interplay between the interests of the advertisers and the platforms.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Just to be clear...

You want the government to regulate some private companies because they're too successful...for the good of the free market?

It's sometimes hard to tell if people are being sarcastic via text...Im assuming you were, right?

Of course. True free markets almost always require a certain amount of regulation. Sometimes a few companies can be so successful that they become too powerful. You can name a half dozen companies that control a huge fraction of our national discourse right now. You may recall that being a big deal during our last election. I think one or two more incidents like Cambridge Analytica and with the growing feeling on the right that they are being disproportionately deplatformed you'll see a growing bipartisan push for some sort of government intervention with Facebook and/or Google, either through regulations or antitrust action.

 

[Sketch]

So, when you have to out of shape people standing right next to each other you can tell who's more masculine?

So if I have a 5'5" Asian man next to a 6' tall white man. The Asian man is always less masculine just by looking at him? No other factors need be assessed except appearance?

Missed this my bad.

I can't believe you are arguing this. Are you serious? I think we both know the answer to this. Hint: we are bipedal

Additional hint: Women prefer height over almost eveththing

Why did you even need to make one Asian in this example of yours?

 

[Thai Otoshi]

The Salt-right is particularly conflicted when it comes to testosterone. They claim to promote trad-life and value raising healthy (white) families while insulting anyone who deviates from their accepted social norms of masculinity. Whereas scientific studies prove fatherhood lowers testosterone in all men because lowered T is advantageous in child rearing. I suppose they all imagine themselves as virile lone wolves impregnating the wives of cucks despite their empty social calendars.

Cutting.

Like a hot knife through butter.

 

[Bamboozled]

This was a big story last year. The advertisers also boycotted to try to renegotiate the terms of their agreement with Google to make them more favorable and used the pretense of their ads being associated with so called extremist context to do so. Nonetheless we're talking about what are essentially market forces here since its an interplay between the interests of the advertisers and the platforms.

Lol as google demonetizes they lose revenue. That makes absolutely ZERO sense.

It's like saying Larry King interviewing a clansman in the 80s you wouldn't want you ad associated with it. Absolutely, 100%, bullshit.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Lol as google demonetizes they lose revenue. That makes absolutely ZERO sense.

It's like saying Larry King interviewing a clansman in the 80s you wouldn't want you ad associated with it. Absolutely, 100%, bullshit.

No, they lose money when the advertisers pull out as they did last year. That's their true source of revenue, not the views themselves.

 

[Higus]

The free market would pay for content as long as it's generating views.

I don't think you understand economics.

I don’t think you understand how YouTube makes it’s revenue.
Porn gets a lot of views. Why doesn’t GEICO put their ads on Pornhub?

 

[Bamboozled]

No, they lose money when the advertisers pull out as they did last year. That's their true source of revenue, not the views themselves.

>pulling out because anons are watching low rentr content despite the fact i costs them next to nothing

sure thing

It's kind of silly that you choose to ignore my Larry King comment. It's convenient. I understand 100% how it works and why. It doesn't make sense for them to do it. Nobody is getting rid of google stock or investor stock because of a fucking ad on youtube.

 

[Bamboozled]

I don’t think you understand how YouTube makes it’s revenue.
Porn gets a lot of views. Why doesn’t GEICO put their ads on Pornhub?

Youtube has a standard of no pornography and shit like that. It's standard. Comparing Pornhub to youtube is asinine.

 

[Islam Imamate]

>pulling out because anons are watching low rentr content despite the fact i costs them next to nothing

sure thing

It's kind of silly that you choose to ignore my Larry King comment. It's convenient. I understand 100% how it works and why. It doesn't make sense for them to do it. Nobody is getting rid of google stock or investor stock because of a fucking ad on youtube.

It does cost these advertisers something, their reputation. Maybe people don't care but these companies seem to think they are associating their brands with these videos their ads are on.

But as I said it was also a pretense for them to renegotiate the terms of their deal with Google.

 

[Bamboozled]

It does cost these advertisers something, their reputation. Maybe people don't care but these companies seem to think they are associating their brands with these videos their ads are on.

But as I said it was also a pretense for them to renegotiate the terms of their deal with Google.

They aren't losing rep. Be real here, nobody is giving a shit about a monetized video and MGTOW. Its a fucking ad. This is just politics, it's not about markets.

 

[Ruprecht]

Youtube has a standard of no pornography and shit like that. It's standard. Comparing Pornhub to youtube is asinine.

No, youtube now operates much like your standard commercial content provider.
Not a no commercials, subscription based model either.
Have a look at how advertising affects commercial television and radio for instance.
Things are also worse at the moment because of the increased potential to spark consumer backlash via social media.
Of course companies are demanding control over where their adverts are placed and how their advertising money is spent. Obviously this is harder to do with a platform like youtube than with commercial TV or radio, but the advertisers have demanded it.

 

[Bamboozled]

No, youtube now operates much like your standard commercial content provider.
Not a no commercials, subscription based model either.
Have a look at how advertising affects commercial television and radio for instance.
Things are also worse at the moment because of the increased potential to spark consumer backlash via social media.
Of course companies are demanding control over where their adverts are placed and how their advertising money is spent. Obviously this is harder to do with a platform like youtube than with commercial TV or radio, but the advertisers have demanded it.

Under Armor has been having issues with marketing for years now though. It's just them playing politics for the sake of playing politics. You're fucking with free speech mediums too, because MGTOW isn't some form of extremist group.

 

[Ruprecht]

Under Armor has been having issues with marketing for years now though.

That's just one example. The number of companies pulling out or threatening Google and youtube over their advertising was well documented.
It's the social media mob effect. People that don't like the content will contact the advertisers and make a fuss about the connection to damage the brand and make them stop funding the content.
Inevitably the big money, broad audience advertising will only want to target "safe" content that you'd typically see on a commercial station. Controversial content will only acquire niche advertising.
Commercialisation. It's not a new phenomenon.

 

[Bamboozled]

That's just one example. The number of companies pulling out or threatening Google and youtube over their advertising was well documented.
It's the social media mob effect. People that don't like the content will contact the advertisers and make a fuss about the connection to damage the brand and make them stop funding the content.
Inevitably the big money, broad audience advertising will only want to target "safe" content that you'd typically see on a commercial station. Controversial content will only acquire niche advertising.
Commercialisation. It's not a new phenomenon.

I understand marketing, I work in the field.

I don't understand without looking at the numbers why they would actually do it.

 

[bad seed]

They aren't losing rep. Be real here, nobody is giving a shit about a monetized video and MGTOW. Its a fucking ad. This is just politics, it's not about markets.

Remember how Breitbart was panicking because it lost all its advertisers? Why do you think the only ads they can get are reverse mortgage shillers and gold buyers? Not even successful conservative businesses like Chick-fil-A want to do business with such filth. Companies care deeply about where they advertise.

 

[Bamboozled]

Remember how Breitbart was panicking because it lost all its advertisers? Why do you think the only ads they can get are reverse mortgage shillers and gold buyers? Not even successful conservative businesses like Chick-fil-A want to do business with such filth. Companies care deeply about where they advertise.

Remember what happened to Breitbart? They lost what made them relevant to those advertisers and what would generate viewers.

People aren't going to stop going to youtube, period. No amount of Ru.tube or Dailymotion is going to change youtube's position as the #1 video streaming site.

 

[Ruprecht]

I understand marketing, I work in the field.

I don't understand without looking at the numbers why they would actually do it.

Why who would do what?
Youtube lost a lot of advertising revenue (not publicised, but there's plenty of estimates), so they want to go brand safe with their monetisation system rather than simply targeting number of views.
They've openly said as much in their own pitch to advertisers.

 

[bad seed]

Remember what happened to Breitbart? They lost what made them relevant to those advertisers and what would generate viewers.

People aren't going to stop going to youtube, period. No amount of Ru.tube or Dailymotion is going to change youtube's position as the #1 video streaming site.

No, Breitbart lost advertisers while it was at the peak of its popularity and still relevant to the Trump administration. It faded into obscurity since.

 

[Islam Imamate]

They aren't losing rep. Be real here, nobody is giving a shit about a monetized video and MGTOW. Its a fucking ad. This is just politics, it's not about markets.

The advertisers themselves care. And like I said if there's any hidden motive its the renegotiating of their agreement with Google to make it more favorable for them. That's absolutely all about markets.