Monitoring on video website

[rmelly]

This point is irrelevant - how many of the 600 viewed by mistake I wonder? youtubes popularity as a single source of content means content on it is much more likely to be found 'by accident' than nearly anywhere else on the web. I could upload something to for example rapidshare, or host it myself, but if I don't tell anyone about it, or post links to it, no one will find it and no search engines/bots etc will pick it up.

 

[car]

youtubes popularity as a single source of content means content on it is much more likely to be found 'by accident' than nearly anywhere else on the web.

While I know youre advocating a moderated youtube site, with 10 hours of content going up every minute, it really would be impossible to moderate. The model serves the online community as well, if all vids were moderated, it would be impossible to get vids up there, so a moderated youtube might not be better for all.

By and large the online community stick to the guidelines, theres enough online sites dealing with the vids from the darker side of society and they know the vids will be left up there. Why take the trouble to post to a site where you know it has a very short life span and leaving yourself a potential to get caught as youtube work with authorities.

While 600 viewers did get to see the vid in question, it was removed once reported, under u.k. law illegal content is to be removed "expeditiously" once reported, which youtube do.

Anyway [broken link removed] about sums it up. Yes, it shouldnt have gone up there, when it went up it should have come down quicker, but a moderated site is not in everyones interest. Looks like we differ on that.

 

[z103]

But the example the OP cited was available long enough to be viewed 600 times - what's the lead time between it being reported and actually being removed? Days, hours, minutes or seconds?

It took three months to be removed.
They also urinated on her according to this;
http://tinyurl.com/5c8qa5

 

[rmelly]

While 600 viewers did get to see the vid in question, it was removed once reported, under u.k. law illegal content is to be removed "expeditiously" once reported, which youtube do.

Well according to the link you supplied this particular clip wasn't removed "expeditiously" once reported.

 

[car]

Well according to the link you supplied this particular clip wasn't removed "expeditiously" once reported.

Theres nothing in that link to say it wasnt taken down expeditiously once reported, they just say it should have come down quicker.

If you want to watch gang rape clips theres enough sites out there, dont search youtube for it. If you dont want to watch them and you accidentally stumble across an instance of it on youtube, press the "stop play" button and report the vid as unsuitable to youtube.
If you feel theres a chance you may come across a gang rape vid or indeed any other type of vid on youtube that you dont want to watch, stay off youtube.

 

[rmelly]

Theres nothing in that link to say it wasnt taken down expeditiously once reported, they just say it should have come down quicker.

Not quite - they admit that a mistake was made - they don't say what that mistake was, I would imagine it was that the request to remove it wasn't acted upon sufficiently quick enough. Otherwise what mistake are they admitting to?

The internet giant explained to MPs today that the offending clip would normally have been taken down from the immensely popular video-sharing site sooner.