Shane Dawson de-monetized on YouTube

[Agunimon 20,252]

I love to see his downfall.

[Morphine Prince 96,178]

3 minutes ago, KillerMonster said:

Glad to see all the Shane supporters speak up. I’ll know who are supporters of racism and pedophilia. 

Cringe if you think I or others here support racism and pedophilia. Learn to think in more than just black and white. 

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Amir said:

I still respect your different opinion, but this is my honest opinion, I am bit more sensitive to struggles of business' as I recently lost mine to covid. 

At least ur not building a business by mocking races, or making disgusting pedophilia content online. Don't worry bout him, he made millions he'll lie in it 

[pop ate my heart 2,720]

Yall were complaining about his apology being bullsh*t, which objectively IS, as he only really owned up to half of his mistakes. So I really don't get why you think this is completely wrong.

I think this is the best way of holding him accountable for his MULTIPLE AWFUL actions, even though they were the ones that built up his career on yt. He totally deserves being called out this way so that he and other guys that came out w bullsh*t atrocious content like this or will in the future know that YT wont put up w that ****, even if they clearly did before. I think that's their purpose w this. Are yall tryna cancel f*cking YouTube now? Lol. Should every massive company that ever supported him be held accountable for it? YT should address the fact that they supported him, sure, but this action is still necessary.

Btw, it's NOT permanent and he's literally a millionaire, it's not like he'll starve. So, I think he really deserves this. If it was a permanent ban, that would be different. But, as it was said, it is a PUNISHMENT for years of doing awful content, and his apologies only mean he wouldn't do it now. But the damage is done and it's HUGE. 

[Guest]

I hope Youtube starts demonitizing Trisha Paytas for making fun of mental illnesses , of black people, and countless others

[OCD 402]

13 minutes ago, justhislife said:

He's still able to post videos and voice his opinion. He doesn't have to spend money on them. And even then it's a hobby. Losing a business due to a pandemic is different from losing business due to racism. I understand it was all a long time ago and he has probably changed a bit, but YouTube is still responsible for their partnership with him and his content reflects on them. 

As he apologized several times, ages ago, and recently, I find it YouTube's own responsibility to make sure that they imply actions on time and not let the content be available for a decade before rolling their responsibility of this very serious and real issue on the creator that has since changed A LOT according to society well needed awakening. 

Not comparing the cause of losing a business. Talking about how real is to lose a business.

Not wishing that to my worst enemy, I feel like some people find it amusing to watch people get their life ruined. It won't end well, that's the new public execution, and it should be done carefully as results can be devastating.

Appreciate you being cool with the conversation, this is not common these days. 

@KanyeWest Thanks for cheering me up friend, but you should really read that too, just because I care.

Wish this pandemic will be over so I can start being less sensitive, I honestly don't know if it messes with my judgement, I truly feel not.

[holy scheisse 20,325]

"Indefinite not permanent" to y'all flipping out that he's being demonetized 

I think it's good, bc while his name is in the open ppl are going to curiously look thru his old videos which would mean he'd be making money off this situation. 

[pop ate my heart 2,720]

2 minutes ago, KanyeWest said:

At least ur not building a business by mocking races, or making disgusting pedophilia content online. Don't worry bout him, he made millions he'll lie in it 

THANKS. He built up his empire literally off of all the offensive content you can think of, and this has to be the last time it happens. With this, future generations will not feel immune do that type of sh*t to gain attention and followers. That's the whole purpose of yt doing this and I'm fine w it. Period

[Florian 19,832]

43 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

They’re doing this to take the blame off of themselves. Shane is the scapegoat. Content like that would have never been on there had they put in place policies against stuff like that. 

That's something YouTube cannot do or the platform wouldn't exist. It's all due to the law in different countries.

In France for example, we make a difference between an "host" (a website where everyone can upload content without any action from the website) and an "editor" (a website that can monitor, modify, have an impact on the content). And the two entities do not have the same responsabilities. On an "host" website, the user is responsible for illegal content. On an "editor" website, the owner is responsible.

For example, let's say I want to upload a Gaga demo. If I do it on YouTube right now, the video will be updated and visible for everyone. If Interscope learns about it, they will ask YouTube to remove the illegal content and can sue the user who uploaded it. YouTube has few days to remove it or then Interscope could sue them too. If YouTube was an "editor", you could not upload the video and make it visible right away, YouTube would have to check if it's illegal or not, then make it visible. Let's say they do not notice it's illegal content and Interscope see that video : they sue YouTube directly.

In conclusion, YouTube cannot monitor the content that is uploaded because of the money it would cost. Every day it's 720 000 hours of content that is uploaded on YouTube. Do you imagine the tons of money and people that would be necessary to check that everything is legal? And of top of that, if a mistake is made they can get sued.

It should also be said that until few years ago (the yearly results aren't public anymore) YouTube was a loss-making department at Google. So imagine if they had to pay to check the integrality of the content uploaded 

[Reality 65,743]

12 minutes ago, KillerMonster said:

Glad to see all the Shane supporters speak up. I’ll know who are supporters of racism and pedophilia. 

No one here SUPPORTS what he did

Y’all need to understand that the world isn’t black or white.

When it comes to cancel culture, I do agree that there are plenty of people out there who DO deserve to be cancelled, but there are others where the situation is more nuanced. Learn to critically think, y’all. 

If y’all want to cancel problematic YouTubers, then I’d be more than happy to FINALLY cancel Jeffree (who has proven that he HASN’T changed) and people like Steve Greene who continues to do the same problematic, shock humor that Shane has done in the past. Let’s cancel CURRENTLY PROBLEMATIC people. 

[Morphine Prince 96,178]

1 minute ago, Florian said:

That's something YouTube cannot do or the platform wouldn't exist. It's all due to the law in different countries.

In France for example, we make a difference between an "host" (a website where everyone can upload content without any action from the website) and an "editor" (a website that can monitor, modify, have an impact on the content). And the two entities do not have the same responsabilities. On an "host" website, the user is responsible for illegal content. On an "editor" website, the owner is responsible.

For example, let's say I want to upload a Gaga demo. If I do it on YouTube right now, the video will be updated and visible for everyone. If Interscope learns about it, they will ask YouTube to remove the illegal content and can sue the user who uploaded it. YouTube has few days to remove it or then Interscope could sue them too. If YouTube was an "editor", you could not upload the video and make it visible right away, YouTube would have to check if it's illegal or not, then make it visible. Let's say they do not notice it's illegal content and Interscope see that video : they sue YouTube directly.

In conclusion, YouTube cannot monitor the content that is uploaded because of the money it would cost. Every day it's 720 000 hours of content that is uploaded on YouTube. Do you imagine the tons of money and people that would be necessary to check that everything is legal? And of top of that, if a mistake is made they can get sued.

It should also be said that until few years ago (the yearly results aren't public anymore) YouTube was a loss-making department at Google. So imagine if they had to pay to check the integrality of the content uploaded 

Yeah but many videos are demonetized for their content which would stop encouraging X type of content on the platform. Or some content is made 18+ 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Amir said:

Appreciate you being cool with the conversation, this is not common these days. 

@KanyeWest Thanks for cheering me up friend, but you should really read that too, just because I care.

Wish this pandemic will be over so I can start being less sensitive, I honestly don't know if it messes with my judgement, I truly feel not.

I noticed that business owners are very empathetic towards anyone losing their source of income from an independent venture/small business. But I personally think that you and Shane are not on the same level. You are a smart young man who opened a business and built it from the ground up with hard work, & respect towards ur customers/partners. Shane is someone who built a social media career on racism, pedophilia jokes & respect towards other social media stars who made fun of black people (Jeffrey Star), of mental illnesses, of LGBTQ community (Trisha Paytas). He's never been interested in makeup and partnered with a not so morally sound person (Jeffrey) for money. He made millions out of it. To demonitize his source of income on Youtube (he has others) is a good thing. He didn't deserve that success. I have nothing but respect and admiration for small businesses, but that's not what Shane is, it's very different. He deserves this punishment, I'm not mad at it at all.

[TortureMeOnReplay 5,030]

2 minutes ago, Amir said:

As he apologized several times, ages ago, and recently, I find it YouTube's own responsibility to make sure that they imply actions on time and not let the content be available for a decade before rolling their responsibility of this very serious and real issue on the creator that has since changed A LOT according to society well needed awakening. 

Not comparing the cause of losing a business. Talking about how real is to lose a business.

Not wishing that to my worst enemy, I feel like some people find it amusing to watch people get their life ruined. It won't end well, that's the new public execution, and it should be done carefully as results can be devastating.

Appreciate you being cool with the conversation, this is not common these days. 

I don't totally disagree with you. I think when people grow and learn it's a good thing, and they can be forgiven based on what happened. But Shane built his following using hateful content. He would not be where he is if it wasn't for the hateful content. If he had at the very least given historical context and brought attention to the issues in ways where he shows why what he just did would be wrong it would have been better. He turned his back on people that wanted to help him and he attacked those people too. I think he might have learned, but even the last year or so he's been hateful. He was hateful during the Jeffree series and he still makes fun of people and situations. He still even tried to be funny during the apology to James, and it wasn't a laughing matter. This demonstrates a complete lack of empathy and maturity in my opinion. I understand coping by laughing things off, but his inappropriate reactions are worrying in the context of mental health in a far different way from depression and mood disorders. If somebody built a legitimate business using their earnings from a cocaine or related substance, they don't deserve to keep their legitimate business. And I feel the same way about Shane's celebrity. 

[Florian 19,832]

3 minutes ago, Morphine Prince said:

Yeah but many videos are demonetized for their content which would stop encouraging X type of content on the platform. Or some content is made 18+ 

But how do you spot a 20s clip of a grown ass man faking to jerk off to a kid poster in a 10mn video without watching everything ?

The best way to do our job as viewers is to report the video whenever we see something shady. That's the only way youtube can realistically notice those things

[TortureMeOnReplay 5,030]

6 minutes ago, Florian said:

That's something YouTube cannot do or the platform wouldn't exist. It's all due to the law in different countries.

In France for example, we make a difference between an "host" (a website where everyone can upload content without any action from the website) and an "editor" (a website that can monitor, modify, have an impact on the content). And the two entities do not have the same responsabilities. On an "host" website, the user is responsible for illegal content. On an "editor" website, the owner is responsible.

For example, let's say I want to upload a Gaga demo. If I do it on YouTube right now, the video will be updated and visible for everyone. If Interscope learns about it, they will ask YouTube to remove the illegal content and can sue the user who uploaded it. YouTube has few days to remove it or then Interscope could sue them too. If YouTube was an "editor", you could not upload the video and make it visible right away, YouTube would have to check if it's illegal or not, then make it visible. Let's say they do not notice it's illegal content and Interscope see that video : they sue YouTube directly.

In conclusion, YouTube cannot monitor the content that is uploaded because of the money it would cost. Every day it's 720 000 hours of content that is uploaded on YouTube. Do you imagine the tons of money and people that would be necessary to check that everything is legal? And of top of that, if a mistake is made they can get sued.

It should also be said that until few years ago (the yearly results aren't public anymore) YouTube was a loss-making department at Google. So imagine if they had to pay to check the integrality of the content uploaded 

YouTube has had so many issues in the past with Shane, it's not like they were unaware of him and his channels. Especially considering he was one of the most subscribed to channels at some point and one of the first to gain fame from the platform. YouTube was making its money, and as long as he didn't do something illegal they didn't care.