This is about someone arguing that watching the YouTube videos of a proven pedophile is okay. I keep reading that comment and all I can see is some rando republican talking about Trump. It's the exact same mindset, and it's deeply disturbing to me.
by Reorox
22 Comments
I’m pretty sure YT does pay with views…
It depends on the adblocker and how it works but generally yeah, no money changes hands when an ad isn’t viewed. Hence why Youtube is so gung ho against adblockers recently, their ad-partners demand it.
YouTube absolutely pays per view. That guy is just trying to avoid admitting he doesn’t give a shit about supporting a pedophile
Watching a YouTube channel, even with an ad blocker enabled, is providing that channel support in the form of increasing their view count, which factors in to the algorithm in how much it is promoted to others. You may not be directly giving them money, but it is still supporting that channel.
I mean is it worth caring about? You don’t know that person. Don’t support pedos but you’re not gonna change their mind or win any argument. You made your point and made it well. Move on.
Who’s the youtube guy?
bottomline if the content creator is indeed a pedo, he is creating content aimed at both adults and children…. let that sit in your head for a moment.
Yeah it’s really crazy what people will excuse if they like a person or the content they make.
I’m going to blindly guess its a DOTA 2 streamer
So yes, depending on the ad blocker, you do deny ad revenue from the creator. Some ad blockers don’t do this though.
If you use an ad blocker, it still counts as a view for the video however. This is still supports the creator even if you are denying them ad revenue since you are increasing the chance that the video gets recommended to other viewers.
Part of why YouTubers do the ads themselves is to get paid better and skipping their ads hurts them, often moreso than ad blockers.
Whether he is financially paying the pedophile, he is enthusiastically giving aid and comfort (and cover) to someone everyone, including him, knows is a pedophile. A disgusting human being.
People ask me why I don’t watch Ben Shapiro or Alex Jones or other right-content.
“Because views and impressions get them paid. Even if it is 0.12$ I don’t care. I don’t want to support them or have my views be used to promote their content.”
Frankly looks like we’re missing context. When did he say he’s fine with a pedo?
Even if the creator made nothing on that guy watching, the algorithm would still include the engagement in its math.
youtube pay based on ads. thats why some adblocker extensions have the option to whitelist specific content creators. And youtubers have the option to remove the ads from a video, but choose not to because that means no money.
They also promote the video based on revenue. If a video is demonetized or if most of that youtuber audience is using adblock, the video(or even the whole channel depending on scale) gets a shadowban. This is why some youtubers avoid certain keywords or topics like a plague even when it’s relevant for the video context. For example, H E double hockey sticks to avoid saying hell.
an audience that uses adblock is only inflating the views count a little, but not really supporting the channel in any other way. especially not financially.
I mean, you’re both right?
YT pays directly for ad views, but increasing the video’s (and channel’s) view count, whether blocking an ad or not, affects the algorithm for their exposure. Granted, a single person’s view can’t singlehandedly get a video on the front page, so one view is a drop in a huge bucket, but a view is a view.
It’s like saying you’re not contributing to microplastics in the ocean if you don’t recycle. You technically are, but your single decision to recycle won’t solve the problem.
No one rain drop thinks it caused the flood
Ad block or not you’re still adding to his view count which is going to drive more people to view the videos.
I still like to watch Pulp Fiction and the Lord of the Rings movies even though Harvey Weinstein produced them.
Doesn’t mean I support Harvey Weinstein’s criminal behavior, but I do support some of the projects he worked on.
People are not one dimensional. It’s possible to find value in something a person has to offer while still rejecting or condemning horrendous acts they have committed.
You’re creating a false moral equivalency between getting something of value from a YouTube video and directly supporting all aspects of the content creator’s life.
There is a chasm between watching a useful video and not caring about where the ad revenue goes and writing a check directly to support a pedophile.
Idk, I think it’s okay for someone to say “I don’t care if I negatively contribute to society”. I think harm is an extremely complex thing, despite what some people want to boil it down to being. It’s not just “did I physically harm you? No? Then there’s no harm”. The list of indirect harm can only extend out so far though, and I don’t fault people for having a shorter line than me. I buy stuff on Amazon because sometimes I like the reliability of an infinite selection of two day shipped items. I use Spotify because otherwise I wouldn’t be able to share links to music with people I care about. I very much understand I’m monetarily benefiting Ek and Bezos, billionaires who make their money exploiting and harming people. I choose to reconcile with this by accepting that the benefit I gain from using their services outweighs the guilt I feel from them benefiting from me. Am I bad person for thinking this? I personally don’t think so, because I believe harm is a matter of magnitude, and if I spent my entire life boycotting them and advocating others to do the same, I believe their corruption/power/influence is so great that I would make zero change in their lives or their companies. I don’t believe interacting [or not interacting] with monolithic companies makes any difference. This gets more complicated with the idea of support and with smaller creators. Other commenters have correctly called out that views boost algorithmic push, so adblocker or not; views are support. I don’t know that I feel any differently about this either, though. If this person can accept that the harm they may cause in supporting this POS person is not outweighed by the benefit they gain from their content, we have every right to criticize them, but they have no obligation to hear us
Sadly pedophilia is an orientation which can’t be changed or cured, same as you can’t cure homosexuals or heterosexuals and change their orientation.
People need to differentiate between pedophile and violent criminal directing kids.
So, is that youtuber rapist or not?