Report claims YouTube benefits from allowing hateful content slipping through cracks

YouTube is all about engagement and viewership. Community guidelines exist to moderate content and keep the platform safe, but it’s an imperfect system that doesn’t always get it right.

A margin of error is to be expected. However, what’s more concerning is that, according to a report by Bot Sentinel, violators often slip through the cracks, and when they do, they still get paid, and so does YouTube.

In an interview with Rolling Stone, the man who founded the research firm, Christopher Bouzy, said the report shows patterns of unchecked harassment towards famous women, namely Meghan Markle and Amber Heard.

The report put the spotlight on five channels whose sole purpose is to make content about Markle. It estimated the channels receive $42,000 per month between them.

Bouzy claims even though these videos contain things like hate speech, misogyny, and racism, they still have advertisements, which means YouTube receives a portion of the profits. He also said YouTube is still rewarding content creators for making hateful videos that violate their community guidelines.

For that reason, he holds the Google-owned platform accountable.

 “YouTube is to blame,” he said, loud and clear. “A lot of these folks would not do what they’re doing if YouTube was not rewarding them. And let’s be clear here, they are rewarding them.

“When you allow these folks to monetize this content, at the end of the day, you’re pretty much facilitating the harassment, the vitriol that we’re currently seeing.”

A spokesperson from YouTube retorted his claims. They insisted the company is committed to “rigorously enforcing these policies equally for all creators,” and encouraged users to keep flagging content.

However, Bouzy thinks the findings in the report suggest others are in danger of having hateful content made about them. So, he wants YouTube to do more, or be forced to do more.

“I think a platform as big as YouTube with billions of views, they have a responsibility now,” he said. “They have a responsibility now to protect their users from some of this toxic stuff that’s been put out there.

“And if they’re not willing to do that, we need legislation to push them.”