In mid-March 2017, a wave of YouTube boycotts spread worldwide. More than 250 brands have withdrawn budgets even asking to remove their brand impressions on YouTube platform videos.
Caused by an investigation found many ads of major brands have appeared alongside videos with bad and extreme content. This list includes big names like Range Rover, Audi, HBO, furniture brands IKEA, HSBC, McDonald's fast food … No one wants their brand image appeared before, during and after the propaganda videos of the fascist organizations, clips containing content for exclusion of Jews or extreme political discussion. As expected, this wave of boycott caused damage to Google in sales of several hundred million dollars.
Reacting to this wave, Google immediately announced it would quickly tighten policies and technology development to enhance the ability to identify videos that attack or harass other people on race and religion. Teacher, gender or similar genres.
By December of the same year, Mars, Diageo and Adidas also decided to cut advertising budgets on YouTube. Later, Mars Group considered and changed its decision, returning to cooperate with Google. But not long after, in August 2018, the company withdrew all YouTube advertising budgets after the image of Starburst candy brand appeared before a video provoking violence for a British gang.
Finally, this wave also showed signs of easing. Because of a number of executives at large companies, they believe that "many advertisers and agents looking forward to this will help them better negotiate with Google in contracts." Translate".
However, in the beginning of February 2019, this wave of boycott suddenly came back stronger. Nestle and many other big companies like Epic Games, Disney, AT&T, Hasbro … announced their ads to be removed from YouTube. The action comes after some Nestle ads show up on videos "where inappropriate comments are made".
And yet, a report shows the existence of a "pedophile network" is using YouTube to find videos showing children in different undressing states. Many videos seem harmless, when showing children exercising or playing in the pool. But the bad guys have left a trace in the comments section of those videos, marking the moment when a part of the child's body is exposed and exposing their true purpose.
Dr.Oetker, Germany's giant food company, also asked YouTube to explain "how could the advertising of our company be put in an environment that we always sternly refused and must be morally considered ".
Advertise a brand in a reactionary clip on YouTube.
However, while major international brands are gradually withdrawing from Google's YouTube platform, at least until this unit takes measures to handle the violations, in Vietnam, the Department of High-Tech & Tourism Development recently discovered. 40 brands appear ads in reactionary clips. Many big names like Samsung Vina, FPT shop, Yamaha, Grab … Some units have explained and stopped advertising on YouTube but some companies are still advertising in reactionary clips like FLC Group, Thaco PC, Saigon International University, Hanoi University of Commerce, Hanoi National University.
In fact, since the beginning of 2017 when the wave of boycott of YouTube broke out, the Ministry of Information and Communications has discovered the status of advertising products and services of many domestic and foreign businesses embedded in videos with malicious content, reactionary violates Vietnamese law on YouTube. In particular, this advertising cash flow was shared by Goolge to the subjects of producing malicious and reactionary clips, indirectly indirectly abetting the activities against Vietnam. The Ministry has sent a warning letter to businesses, and also works with businesses and advertising agencies, Google's representatives to thoroughly overcome the above situation. But the only signs of calm down, not completely point out, then flare up again in recent times.
So why do big companies and brands in the world have trouble with Google in displaying advertising content on YouTube? Why does misplacing happen and does Google or YouTube not have to deal with it completely?
The problem lies in buying advertisements, brands or brands that rarely negotiate individual display positions. What they want is to reach a group of customers and viewers at the lowest cost. Of course, intermediary advertising companies or even YouTube always have white lists (lists of websites or content that their ads may appear) and blacklists (where advertising content cannot appear). But obviously, managing and updating such lists is time consuming and costly. Every day, millions of content is uploaded to YouTube and no one can guarantee 100% safety for the above brands. Even if you really want to spend a great amount of money to make sure the video content displayed is clean, no one can be sure the final result will be perfect.
With Google's paid income policy increasingly open, even criminal organizations and the mafia also crave. According to a report by the Financial Times, the website of the radical Islamist group accused of funding suicide bombings in Jakarta in 2009 used Google AdSense to make money from advertising. Related brands include Microsoft, IBM and Citi Group.
In Vietnam recently, the wave of "live stream" also caused bad publicity and negative images from the community. Although not all contents violate community laws or regulations, Google does not always take measures to handle them all the time. The community regulations that this unit builds are mostly for reference only and do not clearly identify how the content is harmful and influences on viewers, especially young people. Only after a request from government agencies, YouTube turned off making money in some prominent YouTube channels.
YouTube is too big, bigger than Google can control.
Matt Brittin, a Google spokesman, said 400 hours of video were uploaded to YouTube every minute and thousands of websites were added to Google's AdSense network every day. This makes the company's censorship team extremely difficult to ensure brand ads are displayed with secure content.
Google CEO himself, Sundar Pichai has recently said that Google cannot guarantee 100% "clean" YouTube. He said: "We know that we are not on the right track."
Looking back at Google's previous statements in 2017, it can be seen that despite the fact that the company has applied many measures, the results have not changed much. Google cannot thoroughly control the content on its platform. But some experts argue that the company does not want to do so, because it can also mean creating a serious impact on the company's advertising revenue as well as content creators. The giant wants to extend the time to both appease brands, and find a better way to manage content on his own platform.
But this is a non-negotiable issue. A technology company cannot just tolerate the bad to continue making money, and wants its customers to be sympathetic because "they cannot control themselves". Nobody wants their brand image to show on a video with hateful statements or besides news about bombings, or a video oriented to become a bridge for pedophiles.
According to Business Insider, the core problem is that Google has dominated the digital advertising industry. This dominance is so great that it threatens traditional forms of news business. In particular, it threatens both buyers of advertising because if you leave Google, the consequences of sales and profits will drop dramatically. These brands are not able to boycott YouTube permanently, because the number of users this platform holds is too great.
To put an end to this situation, the governments of Europe, have begun to take strong measures including rebuilding the legal framework to manage this giant. But some lonely countries will not be enough.
Google is like a beautiful garden with a solid fence that does not allow third parties to control and manage, including authorities. Meanwhile, it is always watching and analyzing individuals, ie viewers inside the wall to exploit information and sell for profit. But now, this garden has become so big, that it itself cannot control the pests inside. Perhaps, it is time to need a more robust, thorough and decisive measure from many organizations and even countries to join hands to create a safer space for Internet users worldwide. gender.