Through its lawyers, Lady Freethinker also sent a letter to the Justice Department on Monday, accusing YouTube of aiding and abetting the violation of “animal crushing” law. YouTube declined to explain why this video did not violate its guidelines. The one that was not removed shows a live rabbit being fed to a python. Of 10 animal videos that The New York Times shared with YouTube, the company removed nine for violating its violent or graphic content policy. “We agree that content depicting violence or abuse toward animals has no place on YouTube,” Ms. She cautioned that it took time to increase enforcement. Since then, she said, it has removed hundreds of thousands of videos and terminated thousands of channels for violations. Ivy Choi, a YouTube spokeswoman, said the company had expanded its policy on animal abuse videos this year.
#DUNE 2000 VIDEOS HOW TO#
Also, what breaks the rules isn’t always clear, and savvy creators know how to brush up against the guidelines without explicitly violating them.īut Nina Jackel, founder of Lady Freethinker, said in an interview that there was no gray area with many of the animal abuse videos, and that a company of YouTube’s size and resources should be able to identify and remove these clear violations.
“Guidelines matter, but enforcement probably matters more,” he said.īecause 500 hours of videos are uploaded to YouTube per minute, on average, finding and removing content that crosses a line is difficult. Zeve Sanderson, executive director of New York University’s Center for Social Media and Politics, said that a lot of attention was paid to policies created by platforms like YouTube but that a lack of transparency made it hard to study how they were enforced. Enforcement remains a challenge even after YouTube has added thousands of human reviewers and made major investments in artificial intelligence to identify problematic videos before they are uploaded. The lawsuit reflects a repeated criticism of YouTube: Despite detailed and extensive policies for what is permissible, it has struggled to enforce them and prevent dangerous and disturbing videos from reaching its audience of more than one billion users. “It is unfortunate that YouTube has chosen to put profits over principles of ethical and humane treatment of innocent animals.” “YouTube is aware of these videos and its role in distributing them, as well as its continuing support of their creation, production and circulation,” the animal rights group’s complaint said. The guidelines say YouTube also does not allow videos in which humans prompt animals to fight or stage a rescue that places the animal in a dangerous situation. The ban includes videos in which humans inflict physical harm to an animal to cause suffering. YouTube’s community guidelines, the rules for what is allowed on the site, say animal abuse content is not permitted.
Lady Freethinker, which has exposed dogfighting rings in Chile and dog meat auctions in South Korea, said YouTube had ignored the group’s repeated flagging of animal abuse videos. The suit claims that the platform failed to live up to its agreement with users by allowing animal abuse videos to be uploaded and failing to take action when alerted about the content.
Lady Freethinker, an animal rights nonprofit, sued YouTube, accusing it of breach of contract. The videos are now the subject of a lawsuit filed on Monday in California Superior Court in Santa Clara. That meant YouTube’s parent company, Google, was sharing advertising revenue with the people who posted the videos. Some also carried advertisements for pet food or vacation rental homes. Some of the videos have been on the site for years, viewed hundreds of thousands of times. Another monkey is forced to fend off a giant snake slithering toward it while tied to the ground.Īs of Monday, all of those videos of animal abuse - and dozens more - were available on YouTube.
A baby monkey, trembling and screeching in horror, is poked, prodded and pinched inside a basket. A giant python wraps its thick body around the neck of a puppy, which thrashes and squeals in panic.
0 kommentar(er)
