CENSORSHIP

How YouTube is regulated…Don't Cross the Line!Here are some common-sense rules that will help you steer clear of trouble:YouTube is not for pornography or sexually explicit content. If this describes your video, even if it's a video of yourself, don't post it on YouTube. In addition, please be advised that we work closely with law enforcement and we report child exploitation. Please read our Safety Tips and stay safe on YouTube.Don't post videos showing things like animal abuse, drug abuse or bomb making.Graphic or gratuitous violence is not allowed. If your video shows someone getting hurt, attacked or humiliated, don't post it.YouTube is not a shock site. Don't post gory videos of accidents, dead bodies or similar things.Respect copyright. Only upload videos that you made or that you are authorised to use. This means don't upload videos you didn't make, or use content in your videos to which someone else owns the copyright, such as music tracks, snippets of copyrighted programmes or videos made by other users, without the requisite authorisations. Read our Copyright Tips for more information.We encourage free speech and defend everyone's right to express unpopular points of view. But we do not permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status and sexual orientation/gender identity).There is zero tolerance of predatory behaviour, stalking, threats, harassment, invading privacy or the revealing of other members' personal information. Anyone caught doing these things may be permanently banned from YouTube.Everyone hates spam. Do not create misleading descriptions, tags, titles or thumbnails in order to increase views. It's not OK to post large amounts of untargeted, unwanted or repetitive content, including comments and private messages.Please take these rules seriously and take them to heart. Don't try to look for loopholes or try to lawyer your way around them—just understand them and try to respect the spirit in which they were created. Violations of the Terms of Use may result in a warning notification or termination of your account. If your account is terminated you are prohibited from creating any new accounts.

YouTube is for the Community!Remember that this is your community! Each and every user of YouTube makes the site what it is, so don't be afraid to dig in and get involved!

Have fun with the siteThere's a lot here to see, and lots of people making amazing stuff—one of them might be you! Equipment's getting cheaper and easier to use all the time, so dive in and enjoy.

Let people know what you thinkFeedback's part of the experience, and when done with respect, can be a great way to make friends, share stories and make your time on YouTube more fulfilling. So leave comments, rate videos, make your own responses to videos that affect you, enter contests of interest—there's a lot going on and a lot of ways to participate here.

You may not like everything you seeSome of the content here may offend you—if you find that it violates our Terms of Use, then click "Flag as Inappropriate" under the video you're watching to submit it for review by YouTube staff. If it doesn't, then consider just clicking on something else—why waste time watching videos you don't like?

Staying safe on YouTube Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nI2tmiKdPnUInformation from : http://www.youtube.com/t/community_guidelines?gl=GB&hl=en-GB

Jonathan Weinberg writes... Regulation? On the web? You must be thinking I've swallowed some happy pills to make a statement like that. After all, the whole premise of the Internet has always been find anything you want, anywhere - hasn't it?But while it's near on impossible to bring in blanket rules and laws to cover the whole of cyberspace, I do think it is time some sites were forced to put their hands up and take much more responsibility for their actions - and that starts with YouTube.A poll out today found YouTube is the most popular user-generated site in the UK after attracting 10.4 million people in January. That is a 56 per cent increase in traffic compared to 2007 and just shows the reach it has.The success of the video-sharing site has been phenomenal. Such fast growth over the years undoubtedly causes problems and makes it difficult for any company to keep up with the demands of hosting such a vast wealth of moving images.But the Conservative Party in the UK is set to announce today that if they ever get back in power, they would fine companies like YouTube if they fail to remove footage of violent or sexual attacks. They are also said to be announcing a Minister to tackle cyber-crime, which I really applaud.Anything or anyone that can concentrate their efforts full-time on a crucial 21st century problem like that, has to be a positive change and something we are sorely lacking in the UK given the impact technology and the cyber realm has on our lives.This week a woman claimed that her alleged rape was broadcast on YouTube and watched by 600 people. Now, those 600 people deserve shooting as much as anyone responsible for any crime. What kind of person wants to view such sick material?Thankfully, one person saw sense to complain and YouTube rightly removed it immediately as they will do whenever something offensive is raised to them. But it begs the question of should it have got on there in the first place? The nature of a site like this is that a video can be watched by millions in the time between it being uploaded and someone being wise enough to complain. Notice and take down as it is called works well most of the time, but is it the solution when it allows a miniscule percentage to slip through?Even the fines proposed wouldn't stop disgusting and/or criminal videos hitting the web, only a complete pre-watching of content can do that. And with millions of videos an hour going onto YouTube, that is understandably impossible.Video sites now account for five out of 10 of the fastest growing websites, with other brands including Veoh, Video Jug and Tudou all showing triple-figure growth. These firms have to ensure they are doing all they can to be pro-active when it comes to offensive content. I hate the argument proposed by many people claiming "who are we to censor the Internet?". Like publishers in the offline world are barred from printing words or pictures that breach laws, it's about time the online world was put under similar strict rules. It takes major international co-operation to create a system like that and I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen in the next decade. And in the fast-changing world of cyberspace, that's the equivalent of a million years.Just look at YouTube's most recent announcement that it will launch a live video streaming service later this year. That technology allows people to broadcast continuous video to multiple viewers through a webcam.If nasty videos can already be uploaded and viewed until someone complains, how long before we hear of people using streaming to broadcast crimes, offensive racist rants and disgusting sexual abuse of adults and children LIVE to millions around the world.It's a horrid thought but one that must be tackled immediately. If it takes laws, then those laws should be passed. Otherwise, there will be a tipping point when something horrendous happens, and then we'll all be losers from draconian knee-jerk reactions from politicians who only wake up to potential pitfalls of cyberspace... after the alarm has sounded and the lunatics have taken over the asylum.

Issues…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IORjLvk8q1E - William Black on JP Morgan and the Failure to Regulate Wall Street Fraud

Incidents on regulation failure…

http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.b5650?rss=1&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%25253A%252520bmj%25252Frecent%252520(Latest%252520from%252520BMJ)

Although the content of alcohol advertisements is restricted, Gerard Hastings and colleagues find that advertisers are still managing to appeal to young people and promote drinking Research has established that alcohol advertising,1 2 3 like that for tobacco4 and fast food,5 6 7 influences behaviour. It encourages young people to drink alcohol sooner and in greater quantities. From a public health perspective, advertising of alcohol should clearly be limited. The United Kingdom has opted for a system of self regulatory controls that focuses primarily on the content of advertisements, with some limitations on the channels that can be used. This is overseen by the Advertising Standards Authority, through the Committee of Advertising Practice, which represents the interests of advertisers, agencies, and media owners. As part of its alcohol inquiry, the House of Commons health select committee wanted to explore the success of self regulation. It obtained a large number of internal marketing documents from alcohol producers and their communications agencies in order to examine the thinking and strategic planning that underpin alcohol advertising and hence show not just what advertisers are saying, but why they are saying it. Here we present the key insights to emerge.Selection of documentsBecause alcohol advertising is so extensive (around £800m (€900m; $1.3bn) a year)8 it was not possible to examine documents from all relevant companies. Requests were therefore sent to only four producers, chosen for their profile, and their respective communications agencies; and they were asked to send documents relating to just five brands out of the dozens on their books for 2005-8 (table 1 ). We analysed the documents on behalf of the committee. ⇓

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QE2eu9ooiWk - Fukushima Nuclear Disaster: 'a Failure of Regulation, not Operation'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0JtYS7gyYeY - Tory-Labour Banking Regulation Failure

“It seems like after YouTube has been purchased by Google, it has managed to attract a large number of news stories, particularly with calls to regulate the site.The first news item comes from a potential crack-down of YouTube in the UK, as it has been noticed by ministers that the site is used for cyber-bullying, posting violent attacks on the streets, and to humiliate teachers. While the use of the site’s upload capabilities to promote violence are abhorrent, one has to ask whether it is possible to regulate the practice only within the UK. Perhaps YouTube can fulfil better policing and editorial functions, but that would leave them more vulnerable to liability.There are other stories about copyright concerns. The BBC reports that YouTube has had to remove 30,000 infringing clips from Japanese media companies, and then that an independent company has been placing Premiership goals on the site. I believe that what has been taking place has been prompted by the increase in publicity, but also by the fact that YouTube will increasingly become a target for litigation.”(http://www.technollama.co.uk/regulating-youtube)

My opinion…Over the years YouTube has developed a critical censorship and regulation attitude which has changed the way in which we stream and watch video’s that contain a certain content. The rules are specifically in place to stop younger children from accessing explicit video’s that would either influence or upset them and it is still questioned today whether YouTube is doing enough to protect children from such viewings. The thing is, you can’t always protect them because there are some people who are capable of hacking such systems and websites so that they are able to upload video’s that would not normally be accepted by websites. YouTube has these regulations so that we can enforce them as well, and they do their best to censor any material that is majorly inappropriate for any person’s viewing. In my opinion, I feel that YouTube has created a strong censorship and regulation, however I think they could do more in the protection of their website to prevent people from abusing the website and posting inappropriate material on their that is accessible by younger children.