The Silent Google-YouTube Coup

At first, on some videos, an ad would pop up, but you could skip the ad pretty easily. And then, these ads cropped up ahead of more-and-more videos until, eventually, ads you could not skip appear on nearly each video you watch.  And that is precisely Google’s-YouTube Silent Coup.  In May of 2012, YouTube was serving over two billion videos per day or “nearly double the prime-time audience of all three major US television networks combined.” In other words, Google is increasing their revenue considerably with the most recent uptick in advertisement.

27 comments on “The Silent Google-YouTube Coup
  1. I_Cant_Believe_Its_Just_a_Dip says:

    @SV, a minor point(slightly related just) I question your suggestion that zero came in during the middle ages,
    ‘Zero reached Baghdad by 773 AD and would be developed in the Middle East by Arabian mathematicians who would base their numbers on the Indian system. In the ninth century, Mohammed ibn-Musa al-Khowarizmi was the first to work on equations that equaled zero, or algebra as it has come to be known.’
    more likely (and useful) is the invention of calculus by Newton that allowed for complex calculations and this helped change our understanding of the physical world forever.

  2. Jayme says:

    I dislike the one-stop-shop to censorship and intellectual property control. Google has also made it more difficult to access other video providers. This ‘silent coup’ is not un-noticed. It leaves a psychological scar about the video content and is not liked. I prefer alternatives but nothing is free in an artificial world. Low barriers to entry, high barriers for exit.

  3. Tom-Tom says:

    Stop Google’s occupation. Now!

  4. jischinger says:

    Two+ Rants

    What;s worse is the google/yourtube’s software that analyzes videos you upload…

    I used one of JFKs speeches in a video – it is in the public domain – a few years ago some other guy used the same speech and added a music track to it then published his version – – what came up when I uploaded the speech was a copyright violation based on this guys copyright – even though I didn’t use his music track-

    Since the guy who used the speech copyrighted his music youtube’s software now thinks this guy’s publishing company owns the speech. This means anyone who uploads that speech owes this guy’s publishing company; not only do they get copyright over the speech they also receive the ad revenue that is now forced on your video.

    Hundreds of people have uploaded this speech on youtube and all the ads attached go to this conglomerate.

    Arguing with youtube gets you no where because youtube nor google allow you to contact them.

    Arguing with the publishing company is more than a hassle, they are extremely rude and they want all your personal information.

    You need a lawyer to go after them or you end up spending hours of time arguing with them via e-mail, and if You Tube sides with them and you appeal you’re SOL without a lawyer.

    There are also people who upload their own original work and end up fighting these scumbags, that’s the kind of power they have.

    I did get some relief when I called the JFKLibrary and I let them know this company was profiting off of the the Presidents public speeche.

    After informing the company and sending the information I received from the JFK Library they released their claim, but just on MY video. They are still profiting off all the other people who uploaded the audio of the speech.

    There are hundreds of other people uploading and sharing public domain speeches and materials, however, there are a number of publishing companies scamming the system claiming copyright and ad dollars for things that belong to the public. Most People do not know what is and isn’t public domain and they are too lazy to bother – they think as long as their video wasn’t taken down, who cares!

    In addition, if you do win the battle of protecting the public domain material or fair use and get these companies to removed their claim, they will send out their sub-companies t make a new claim and you will have to start the whole process over again.

    These guys are doing what wall street does, shave pennies off the top until they get caught. These outfits are vultures and they know it.

    RE: ADS
    I scrap all ads in my browser – I contribute in time or in direct donations

    Back to youtube – if a tuber tells people to click their ads they will lose their ad partnership. You can tell people to like, fav and sub, but not click on the ad.

    Course I never figure out why if you like someone’s work you wouldn’t just click on their ad to help out, perhaps people aren’t aware of that because the contract says you can’t tell them that.

    Anything based on deception is deceptive.

    And I never understood why You Tubers felt it was okay that other tubers who are direct partners – some being paid a six figure salary by google – are being paid with the ad revenue your videos are generating.

    Apparently, the donate or support buttons people can link from their youtube channel to their web site doesn’t generate enough revenue so I think there needs to be a new system developed.

    Many have tried new video sites, but they haven’t brought in the revenue to sustain themselves or come close to the success of YouTube.

    Since Google/YouTube is as close as you can get to a video monopoly on the web it might be time to either break them up or give YouTube to the public trust.

    After all without the infrastructure built by tax payer dollars, that youtube needs to survive, perhaps it’s time the people get a little something back other than their tax dodging parent company – something this big and important in the hands of the few is dangerous for democracy.

    Along with these draconian copyright laws – big changes need to happen – and another good reason for secession.

  5. bproman says:

    I have a special list for these ads and I make sure I never buy their products.

  6. elo says:

    uhm, Adblock… ppl need to educate themselves.

  7. Bruce says:

    elo, exactly.

    Free ad-blockers are available for most popular browsers.
    Adblock Lite :: Add-ons for Firefox
    Adblock Edge :: Add-ons for Firefox
    Adblock Edge
    (two useful ones for The Mozilla Firefox web browser)

    Chrome Web Store – AdBlock
    …for an ad-blocker for Google’s privacy-invasive Chrome browser.

    Running Apple’s Safari?
    Safari AdBlock

    Running Opera?
    Fanboy’s Adblock List for Opera (a bit more involved)

  8. Febo says:

    I used Adblocker for a while – it was great. Then it requested I upgrade, I thought why not? and it promptly started asking for cash. well what a cheek. it for asking, me for refusing.

  9. Ptah says:

    Google is fighting a losing battle at present. It is no longer regarded as the best search engine unless you are looking to consume products, as all its results are configured around this and not … say… academia. It has no presence behind the emerging paywalls of paid App offerings – on tablet and mobile devices and more corporate networking is blocking ads to conserve bandwidth. It will be interesting to see some genuine innovation from Google and not just the standard linear ramping-up of existing philosophies. Presumably Android devices allow them to snoop on your App behaviour patterns currently only indulged by Apple..!

  10. Bruce says:

    Febo | November 19, 2012 at 9:37 am |
    I used Adblocker for a while – it was great. Then it requested I upgrade, I thought why not? and it promptly started asking for cash.
    It’s possible the addon was updated (or when freshly-installed) and took to you to their ‘requested donation’ page. You can ignore it and/or simply disable add-on updates in your browser. There are only one or two that do this though.

    Adblock Edge and Adblock Lite shouldn’t request a donation ( both for Firefox, choose which one you prefer, both work fine but you only need one of them).

  11. Bruce says:

    Ptah | November 19, 2012 at 9:47 am |
    Google is fighting a losing battle at present. It is no longer regarded as the best search engine unless you are looking to consume products, as all its results are configured around this and not … say… academia.
    If there’s one thing they’ve got, it’s their search engine, which I still find to be better in general than the rest that I’ve tried. What are you using instead of Google?

    What I don’t like is their ultra-spyware Android operating system and their heavy integration with their spyware services and the gall to track your every move with their email apps, their navigation apps, the sly starting of services and updates without your permission and the request that info is sent back to Google when turning on the GPS. Absolutely shocking operating system…built on the back of open-source efforts. Linux with spyware…

    Doesn’t surprise me since they are in bed with the CIA and want to control everything. I’d give their search engine the flick if I knew something half as good as what they already offer. I don’t do many searches on academic articles though, so for those purposes there may be better.

  12. Do you guys want to pay for Youtube instead? How much do you think it costs to serve over two billion videos per day?

  13. Bruce says:

    Silver Bullet | November 19, 2012 at 10:31 am |
    Do you guys want to pay for Youtube instead?
    Yeah, I’d love to; that would be the end of their massive cash cow right there. They aren’t stupid enough to ever attempt that.

    Google is making bajillions and using every trick in the book to pay no tax on it, all the while invading every last bit of privacy you have left (sim card serial number, phone number, contacts you associate with, mail, trips you take using Google Maps, sending location data back to Google as a condition of turning on the GPS in your Android phone, unique Street View databases being cross-linked with your data, wifi password data, the works…), all the while making all sorts of backroom deals selling you out. Far be it for me to feel sorry for them or do nothing while they feed us their useless ads and invasive services.

    Just Google (!):
    Google tax
    Google Streetview privacy
    Google CIA
    Android privacy

    Not that any of this justifies blocking their ads; I simply couldn’t care less about a multi-billion dollar corporation going broke or suffering hardship because of my choice to block their p00p 🙂

  14. SomeAnon says:

    I don’t see the problem here; aren’t we used to commercials from TV? Is it really that intruding? Should Google just keep serving video’s without any revenue therefrom?

    For the adblocker-fans – just use a decent HOSTs file. They’re available for free.

  15. Bruce says:

    hosts files are very inflexible; if you want to allow ads from a particular advertiser, you can do that with an ad-blocker. A hosts file is very inflexible for the masses to install, I would argue…and more of a pain to edit/change and provide no clues as to which rule has blocked which ad, or the current amount of ads blocked on a page you visit.

  16. Bruce says:

    …more than that, hosts files cannot be disabled on-the-fly should you wish to see all the ads for some reason (in the event of a false positive, for instance)

  17. donk says:

    I don’t see ads on Youtube, as I use the HOSTS file from which is updated every month. I have also added some of my own IP and web addresses, as media players and such like to phone home to report what file has been played. I believe people also add it to their Android phones too.

    I think I also did a reg hack FALSE/TRUE value for Youtube ads somewhere, but can’t remeber for the life of me what it was. (Might be a media player thing)

  18. BankingThiefs says:

    I have no problem with adverts, if it helps the content producer, I have a problem with their music system claiming ownership of your content though. There is no option to say “no this claim is invalid” unless you own and have proof for everything. This allows the music cartel to claim blanket ownership because they know most people will not fight their claim even if they know it’s wrong.

  19. Ptah says:

    Bruce: I use a combination of search engines – ah, and books can top search-engines too believe it or not. The results produced by Google are skewed toward a purchase on the assumption all we want to do is consume. In general I am finding Wolfram Alpha more useful for non-consumer searches or I go directly to Wikipedia and bypass the ‘middle-man’. Inevitably I use Google when I want to splash-some-cash. The point is, its not just me – the drop in market price of Google reflects that they have problems and the point highlighted in this post is in some respects a corporate response to these problems. BTW, Vimeo is very good if you don’t like YouTube.

  20. Kim Briggs says:

    Hitler reacts to Hitler parodies being removed from YouTube

  21. Talcott says:

    TY for that link Kim, best one of the lot.

  22. Christophe says:

    I heard a few months ago that people were adapting bittorrent to make it web-video-friendly – the idea being that you could then offer something like YouTube for very cheap, since most of the bandwidth is the video (not the html/javascript/flash of the host page). In other words, you watch the video directly on the HTML page and it starts playing as soon as enough frames have been downloaded from your peers. To the user it feels the same as YT, basically.

    I think that idea is really cool and figure it’s only a matter of time before we switch to that.

    As far as Google’s ads and their desire to make many a buck off of our viewing habits, don’t forget how Google is zionist and basically evil, that their strategic priority is being THE place for videos, so that they can not only censor the political stuff they dislike, but also keep track of what people watch and also fiddle with the reported numbers and indexes so that people are constantly offered tits and poodle tricks to distract them from anything significant…

    It’s pretty funny when Google decides to block something though: people have so many alternatives (bittorrent being the ultimate one), that they can’t ultimately censor as much as their black zionist hearts would like. Hahaha. Ya gotta love using their own tools against them… 😛

  23. Vonda Bra says:

    @ Bruce
    @ What are you using instead of Google? ?

  24. kdt says:

    LOL what good is it? I keep geting adds in spanish ……………i dont speak spanish(unless ordering mexican food in “spanglish”counts

  25. el bandido says:

    that’s why ive been using :
    Provides a clean interface together with a no-tracking privacy policy.

    The Biggest Long-Term Threat To Google:

  26. Bruce says:

    Vonda, I haven’t found any of them to be as effective as Google for my uses, unfortunately.

    Plus I don’t know what the equivalent of what “allintitle:” is on those search engines (which normally brings only results with certain words in the title of the page with Google). Plus tags like “site:” which restrict searches to just some sites.

    I just haven’t found any as effective, and ‘private’ privacy policies (especially when they advertise them as such) I often find is just another way to segment a certain type of user and just do what they want with the data anyway.

    Though I’ll try the link you posted again and see if things have changed with that search engine.

  27. Bruce says:

    el bandido, I’ll try that one again too.

    Maybe I need to spend more time with them to get the best out of them.

Watch the latest Keiser Reports:

Buy Gold Online
Buy Gold Online