We’ve re-established discussions with YouTube. In dialogue with them we’ve elaborated our proposals for improved communication, fairness, and transparency into a detailed list of concrete, practical suggestions. And: they liked them. We should have more detailed feedback soon, which will be made public.
More info on the Facebook group →
- Publish all categories and decision criteria that affect monetization and views of videos
- Give clear explanations for individual decisions — for example, if a video is demonetized, which parts of the video violated which criteria in the Advertiser-Friendly Content Guidelines?
- Give YouTubers a human contact person who is qualified and authorized to explain decisions that have negative consequences for YouTubers (and fix them if they are mistaken)
- Let YouTubers contest decisions that have negative consequences
- Create an independent mediation board for resolving disputes (here the Ombuds Office of the Crowdsourcing Code of Conduct can offer relevant lessons)
- Formal participation of YouTubers in important decisions, for example through a YouTuber Advisory Board