Facebook and YouTube Block RT, Other Russian Channels From Earning Ad Dollars (usnews.com) 65
Reuters reports:
YouTube on Saturday barred Russian state-owned media outlet RT and other Russian channels from receiving money for advertisements that run with their videos, similar to a move by Facebook, after the invasion of Ukraine.
Citing "extraordinary circumstances," YouTube said in a statement that it was "pausing a number of channels' ability to monetize on YouTube, including several Russian channels affiliated with recent sanctions." Ad placement is largely controlled by YouTube. Videos from the affected channels also will come up less often in recommendations, YouTube spokesperson Farshad Shadloo said.
He added that RT and several other channels would no longer be accessible in Ukraine due to "a government request...." YouTube previously has said that it does not treat state-funded media channels that comply with its rules any differently than other channels when it comes to sharing ad revenue.
Meta Platforms Inc, owner of Facebook, on Friday barred Russian state media from running ads or generating revenue from ads on its services anywhere in the world.
CNN's Ukraine-Russia updates point out that YouTube's actions follow a warning letter to YouTube's parent company Alphabet on Friday by Virginia Democratic Senator Mark Warner. "Warner said his staff was able to find instances of RT's monetization on YouTube, and that he had alerted the Departments of Justice and Treasury to a report about YouTube allowing sanctioned entities to monetize on YouTube as well. "
Citing "extraordinary circumstances," YouTube said in a statement that it was "pausing a number of channels' ability to monetize on YouTube, including several Russian channels affiliated with recent sanctions." Ad placement is largely controlled by YouTube. Videos from the affected channels also will come up less often in recommendations, YouTube spokesperson Farshad Shadloo said.
He added that RT and several other channels would no longer be accessible in Ukraine due to "a government request...." YouTube previously has said that it does not treat state-funded media channels that comply with its rules any differently than other channels when it comes to sharing ad revenue.
Meta Platforms Inc, owner of Facebook, on Friday barred Russian state media from running ads or generating revenue from ads on its services anywhere in the world.
CNN's Ukraine-Russia updates point out that YouTube's actions follow a warning letter to YouTube's parent company Alphabet on Friday by Virginia Democratic Senator Mark Warner. "Warner said his staff was able to find instances of RT's monetization on YouTube, and that he had alerted the Departments of Justice and Treasury to a report about YouTube allowing sanctioned entities to monetize on YouTube as well. "
it's not polically correct to invade a country?? (Score:5, Funny)
Against the narrative (Score:2)
Cancel-culture, am-I-right? Geez, snowflakes...you send 150,000 troops to invade a sovereign country and the communist politically correct forces of Meta/Alphabet cancel you. Is there no such thing as free speech any more?!?!? Someone needs to make a law to prevent social media companies from censoring people based on their views...particularly if Ukraine is yours or not!!!
I guess the soviet invasion goes against their narrative.
But note that they didn't shut those outlets down, just removed their ad revenue.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not for "discussing ivermectin," it's for spreading dangerous misinformation as to the efficacy of ivermectin, often along side misinformation about the vaccines giving you ball cancer, or otherwise somehow impacting your fragile erectile capacity.
They do not have a choice (Score:2)
In the case of YouTube, sources which are state funded are clearly marked and videos regarding controversial topics come with fact pages linking to known safe sources (which can include Wikipedia if
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Cancel-culture, am-I-right? Geez, snowflakes...
I think the Russians have gotten very familiar with snowflakes.
Re: (Score:1)
I think the real snowflakes have become the witting or unwitting fifth column for the Russians, along with their Snowflake in Chief Donald Trump
Re: (Score:2)
Cancel-culture, am-I-right?
No one is being canceled. YouTube is just shutting off the money flow.
Russia should have a right to express its viewpoint. Dialog is good.
Russia doesn't have a right to profit from Google's infrastructure.
Re: (Score:2)
That wooshing sound you hear .... yeah
The right wing is literally saying (Score:2)
Sad thing is it seems to be working. They're winning elections with it. The governor of Virginia won his election by running on anti-trans and critical
Re: (Score:2)
Part of me does wonder how you fucks would spin this if Trump were still in office, because let's face facts- Putin doesn't give one flying fuck who's President of the US. Even if Trump is too fucking stupid to know what his powers are, Putin is well aware, and he knows he's essentially untouchable as long as he contains the vandalism to his own backyard.
Re: (Score:2)
Part of me does wonder how you fucks would spin this if Trump were still in office, because let's face facts- Putin doesn't give one flying fuck who's President of the US.
Or on the other hand, one might alternatively speculate that this is an attempt to make Biden look weak, in hopes of getting Trump reelected, under a belief that Trump can be more easily influenced and controlled.
Re: (Score:1)
Putin doesn't give one flying fuck who's President of the US
Then why did his troll farms work to get Trump into office? I disagree with your entire premise. Putin has a leash on Trump in the form of being the only place Trump can get money (Russian banks that is) but presumably only by sucking him off at every turn. Putin can't influence Biden because Biden doesn't need what Putin has, but he can influence Trump because Trump does.
Re: (Score:2)
Putin's goals were likely more to foster division and discord in the US. That helped get a fringe president elected, but more importantly to him it created a division that is harder to fix.
Re: (Score:2)
Ideally no matter what you do, it supports multiple goals.
The idea that things done by governments are done for one reason is usually false.
I stand by my analysis, but of course there are multiple reasons for taking these actions. Simply sowing discord among your enemies is always valuable, it makes them less effective, so that is certainly one of the reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
I wasn't saying that Putin doesn't have a preference for who is in office, or the will and desire to help that become a reality. I think every state leader has a preference for who they're dealing with.
Interpreting Putin's geopolitical moves under the lens of what President was in office drips with hubris.
There's no evidence that the Russian Federation, or the Soviet Union before it, factors the US President into their extracurricular border-crossing adventur
Re: (Score:2)
Bill Clinton I assume by your list.
Peace in Korea (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Rather dark humor, but today's scan for Funny is coming up quite dry...
Re: (Score:2)
Excellent. Thank you.
Finally! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When can we expect them to join the Ministry of Truth?
They would, but it's Russia-controlled monopoly...
What About The Oppressed? (Score:2)
I mean I understand shutting down these services because of revenge/fear but it leaves the minority population or maybe the major majority, I don't know the situation, without a voice.
Not sure this is the right approach.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the situation was that they are still on YouTube, just not making money any more. Citation otherwise?
Re: (Score:2)
Taking away someones income is pretty oppressing to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Taking away someones income is pretty oppressing to me.
Theses are quasi-state channels. I am sure they still get their now-worthless Russian ruble salaries to push KGB's PR.
Re: (Score:2)
Taking away someones income is pretty oppressing to me.
Theses are quasi-state channels. I am sure they still get their now-worthless Russian ruble salaries to push KGB's PR.
All Russian media has been "required to use information exclusively from official Russian sources when reporting": https://interfax.com/newsroom/... [interfax.com] A reminder: https://interfax.com/newsroom/... [interfax.com] Naming of news outlets in breach and demands for removal of articles or the government will block them: https://interfax.com/newsroom/... [interfax.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Well then what do you think the right approach is, asking the Russians nicely to stop? At least the Russians who are losing their incomes still have their nation intact and don't have foreigners killing their children.
Re: (Score:2)
if I let you open a shop in my mall and you break your lease I can evict you without being oppressive at all. You shouldn't have broken the lease or alternatively you should have chosen any place else by my mall to open your sop.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Pausing monitization? (Score:5, Insightful)
SHUT
THEM
DOWN
Re: (Score:1)
SHUT
THEM
DOWN
No, Demonetization is good, but Russia's voice should not be silenced.
In a time of crisis, shutting down communication is the worst thing you can do.
Re: (Score:2)
No, Demonetization is good, but Russia's voice should not be silenced.
In a time of crisis, shutting down communication is the worst thing you can do.
Easy going, snowflake, Russia is still connected to the outside world on the internet. Google not giving the free hosting is not silencing them. They can and do host themselves as well. And you have to be a particular kind of tool to refer to blatant state propaganda during an invasion as "communication in a time of crisis".
Re: Pausing monitization? (Score:2)
Ta letter from a senator? (Score:2)
hypocracy (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Yea it's fairly telling that they only took this measure on the 3rd day of the assault.
Re: (Score:1)
Just since you seem to be a complete dumbfuck, let me explain to you that they were under no explicit or implied obligation to accept money or propaganda from a hostile foreign entity, even before the sanctions, and neither were you. So yes, why indeed?
Re: (Score:2)
What a load of hypocracy from these platforms.
The red squiggly line under the word means you need to look at your dictionary before trying to use it.
They could easily Block those channels, but only prevent them for earning money.
They prevent them from earning money so they don't finance evil. They can't prevent them from getting their message out, so they might as well keep the bulk of viewers going where they won't get paid for plays.
While other channels that stand up for people rights and speak the TRUTH Get blocked from earning money, Because the platform don't like what they're saying.
Yeah, by all means, complain about that. But why complain about this? The two things are not the same. This is in fact the opposite of that.
Oh no!!!11 (Score:2)
That really won't do much. Mainly since I've already blocked RT 'News'. And Facebook.
Blocking the money or the ads? (Score:2)
Are they stopping the showing of ads, or just the money from them (thus putting the money in Alphabet's pockets)? If the former, we may have found a loophole to lessen the ad plague on the 'net.