Who /elsagate/ here? If you've dug into that shitheap and

>>11506827
Ok I know about these videos but what happened to earn the gate suffix?

>>11506830
/pol/ and /x/ are convinced it's orchestrated by pedophiles cooperating to brainwash a generation of children. While probably not true I can't say that I blame them for getting worked up about it, the sheer scale of the phenomenon and how YT has done absolutely nothing about it is spooky as fuck

>>11506829
WHAT THE FUCK

>>11506832
some of the videos have fake thumbnails, but many have content that is decidedly not appropriate for the age group they target

>>11506831
I honestly kind of like some aspects of some of this stuff.
Maybe I am just looking at the less bad varients because I have never seen stuff like >>11506829

>>11506831
I am pretty sure the reason more and more of these get made and nobody does anything is because now people actively look for it and watch it.
Just look at how many hits these videos have just from people probably looking around for these shock factor conspiracy things.
Also some of the words in the captions make me think they just make videos based off of the top google searches.

File: 1499394193349.png (112KB, 837x717px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 837x717px

>>11506831
I can't say anything on that but what I don't get is that YouTube is cracking down on everything but these videos.
Why hasn't marvel or Disney sent them a Cease and desist? Are they like geniuses riding the line of the YouTube rules? Does YouTube turn a blind eye because it makes them a ton of ad revenue?
I don't know

>>11506835
>Just look at how many hits these videos have just from people probably looking around for these shock factor conspiracy things.

I don't think that can account for over 30 million views.

>>11506831
It's one of those things where the phenomenon at hand is so immane and inexplicable that any explanation seems reasonable at some level.

Is there any high level reporting about this phenomenon? I could imagine this being the sort of thing BBC Panorama would cover.

>>11506831
>/pol/ and /x/
No reason to read any further

>>11506837
>people haven'y figured out that they're using bots to scam Jewtube

>>11506835
The videos would have millions 9f views even when we just started making thread about it. The fact YouTube does nothing is extremely disturbing and a red flag in itself

>>11506841
Then YouTube would definitely crack down on it because fake hits are going to make advertisers drop you.

>>11506836
My theory, and I think it holds up, is that they're a way for the Russian mafia to launder botnet into "clean" money; bot-driven views on low-effort videos, perhaps even Neural Network generated videos (in the case of the "XYZ Finger Family" videos which all share the same ~100 models reshaded in infinite iterations and variations, e.g. Leopard-print Apache Helicopter Daddyfinger and Purple Godzilla Daughterfinger), or randomly-generated concepts farmed out to lowest-bidder pajeets in the case of the ones posted in this thread. The goal is not to create "real" content, it's to create plausible-enough content that people don't immediately go "aha! this is a russian botnet laundering scam" when they see e.g. 10000 videos of microsoft sam reading wikipedia articles, each with 50m views.

>>11506838
It's one of the few things where I'd believe Giorgio A. Tsoukalos when he says it's aliens.

>>11506831
Good to know it's still safe to assume anything that ends in -gate is about a bunch of subhuman mongoloids getting high huffing each others smegma.

All I know is that a part of YouTube's new rules on what is considered advertiser unfriendly was supposed to discourage these and similar videos from flooding their site, yet they've clearly not stopped while other content creators have had to suffer under those same rules.

>>11506841
If you wanted to do that then why let them get so weird that it attracts attention to them?

>>11506839
National ABC News did something, but at a very high-level 'some things on YouTube aren't appropriate for you child even if they look like they are'.

im wondering how these channels are dealing with the adpocalypse, or if it has even hit them, if not then they figured out the system.

>>11506844
Oh, and as for C&Ds, the reason Marvel and Disney are having trouble cracking down is:

1) they aggressively create new channels, upload a dozen videos a day for like a month, then move on
2) they have no real organic viewership, which means their viewers are segmented away from the youtube general population, which makes the videos hard to discover organically or even with dedicated anti-infringement searching
3) the videos, in most cases, fall in a pretty defensible realm of parody; in some cases the names of the specific characters aren't even used, and in basically every case there is significant addition to the characters as published by the IP-holders; they don't rehash stories, they don't even rehash casts mostly, most of the videos are ensemble casts. If it wasn't shit, you'd just call it a parody like any other, and the law has a hard time discerning shit from not-shit, which means DMCAs against these are tricky; some of them will, quite rightfully, be rejected. DMCA is, in theory, only supposed to be used in clear-cut infringement, and these aren't really clearly out of the realm of parody.

>>11506831
Some people like to break and exploit things just because they can, this is incomprehensible to conspiracyfags.

File: be6[1].jpg (13KB, 224x216px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 224x216px

>people still thinking these are anything but clickfarm fodder
Indian making a cent an hour makes a cartoon with their guidelines and uploads it to channel

Other Indians making a cent an hour use their arrays of 100+ smartphones each to give the video hundreds of thousands of views for ad revenue that dwarfs their pay

Repeat.

Youtube doesn't care because real people don't watch or care about the videos but they bolster youtube's ad numbers

>>11506852
that sounds ingenious

>>11506831
>it's orchestrated by pedophiles cooperating to brainwash a generation of children

You don't mean...that all parents would have to do to avoid their children becoming pedo victims is to monitor their behavior and not hand them an ipad for five hours straight?

You couldn't possibly be suggesting that people...oh, god...BE PARENTS?!

>>11506853
It's a money machine. In goes human suffering, out goes money for the owner of the clickfarm and the owner of the channel operation.

I don't understand why the morons in /pol/ and /x/ need to build big complicated conspiracies around stupid shit like "conditioning" when profit motive fits and is so much simpler.

C O M I C S
A
R
T
O
O
N
S

>>11506853
>>11506852
The problem is these channels would get shut down in a heartbeat for abusing the ad revenue not remain untouched. Advertisers will drop clients if they aren't making sure it's real people seeing the ads.

>>11506836
>I CAN'T POSSIBLY REPORT THINGS WHY HASN'T EVERYONE ELSE
just fucking neck yourself

>>11506858
The videos and channels have been reported a shit load you brainlet

File: cambodiaclickfarm_youtube[1].jpg (211KB, 1200x850px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 1200x850px

>>11506857
>>95284327
>The problem is these channels would get shut down in a heartbeat
Did you not even read this thread? The channels go up, get a video a day for a month, then go down.

Who's going to tell the advertisers that X percent of their ads are being seen by clickfarms? Not youtube. Not anyone working for the ad agency. 99% of the people involved benefit from this scam.

What, did you think this was the first clickfarm operation? Have you been living under a rock?

Are these videos actually breaking Youtube's terms of service, or do people just want them gone because they're "cringy"?

>>11506902
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwjoPtSoNLAoX2sLBaKLYng
since 2013
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUH9vdpE4IhyjdnH57fsqlw/about
since 2016
https://www.youtube.com/user/toyscouter/about
since 2014

you are wrong and a liar.

>>11506934
They're almost certainly a violation in that they exist to farm ad revenue

Youtube doesn't care because more ads shown is more ads sold

Same reason Reddit/Twitter don't give a fuck about massive networks of bot accounts - a higher number of registered users and hits helps them sell ads.

>>11506965
Except they DO care which is why you can loose your, say, google adsense account if you click too many ads, get banned, ect ect even if your are not using a program to do it.

>>11506963
Oh, I'm sorry, a few channels aren't rotating so that means it must be a librul conspiracy to brainwash kids into being ok about getting fucked

Seriously, become an hero. If you can't accept that this shit is clickfarms and all about money you're too stupid to live.

>>11506987
Do you want me to post more channels that have been up for several years to prove you that these are not getting nuked at the rate they should be or will you accept that maybe the world is more fucked up than you want to admit.

>>11506998
>not getting nuked at the rate they should be
I'm sorry, are you trying to make a point? Your text says yes but there's nothing there.

What part of "youtube benefits and so does not care" was too hard for you?

Shit, why am I even trying to reason with an /x/-naut, go masturbate to some crystals

>>11507015
>What part of "youtube benefits and so does not care" was too hard for you?
what part of
"youtube will have advertisers drop them if they aren't effective in deleting channels that abuse ad rev" do you not understand? The fact that these videos get a blind eye is highly suspicious anon. The fact these videos went a little viral on SM and youtube still never acknowledged them is highly suspicious.

Youtube does not benefit from people abusing their ad rev feature, its their job to keep it on lock down so that can actually get paid by advertisers.

>>11506965
What are you talking about? Since early 2017, they massively demonetise channels because they are not ad-friendly. Even videos that dont fall under that get the threatment. Just some wording like fart will get you that.
And to be honest i have the feeling these videos are less in trends.
I dont believe they really make that many ad money anymore.

>>11507015
>i don't know anything about click fraud or how its combated the post

so do you guys think bootleg chinese shit also exists to brainwash children

after all disney hasn't struck down every single one of the countless number of them so clearly there's something more devious and not just bootlegs being a goddamn infestation that gets pumped out faster any one company can keep up with.

>>11506827
>only 87,000 views
Is it dying? Is it finally fucking dying?

File: evil_stick.jpg (31KB, 602x386px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 602x386px

>>11507090
I think it exists to disturb/harm children. Some of the shit from china definitely had maliciousness hidden behind its design. pic related

>>11506965
So some poor asians are siphoning money from jewtube. Are people mad because they didn't come up with it first?

>>11507124
Anyone can understand that, what we can't understand is why they chose to make the disturbing content they did. If it were as simple as click fraud, they would have shut them down quickly not let them exist for years.

People coming up with these theories must been teens who grew up reading creepypastas.

I'd be more concerned with kids watching South Park or hotdiggedydemon

>>11507143
>Anyone can understand that
Apparently not
>>11507090
>>11507089
>>11507078
>>11507037

>why they chose to make the disturbing content they did
I don't understand why you think the content is somehow coordinated beyond the instructions to avoid copyright strikes through (parody) fair use. It's just random shit from the minds of pooinloos and mainland chinese.

>If it were as simple as click fraud, they would have shut them down quickly not let them exist for years.
That's not a reasonable conclusion. Any number of things from cooperation to coercion to apathy to incompetence could explain why clickfraud channels are still up.

>>11507212
>Apparently not
So you cant read? I >>11507078 wrote i dont believe that they still made that many money. Since companies got so butthurt about inappropriate videos and that i dont see them in the trends anymore.
I just stated the theory that their ads revenue is going down. We can find these videos, but we cant see which are still making money or not.

last time i searched up youtube poop videos i get someone eating poop. with 30 million views. what the actual fuck

I think it's clear that these videos are not fuelled by clickfarms only. There's tons of shitty parents who pacify their 3-6 year olds with iPads, when the parents aren't looking they're obviously going to click the "naughty" looking thumbnail in the list of recommended videos. You'll also notice how in all of these videos, the audio track is eerily incongruent with the video, always happy and bouncy even if the character onscreen is getting a syringe shoved in its ass, so parents will be less likely to notice anything weird going on.

>>11507104
>I think
you do not

>>11506844
This.
It's all robots learning from popular searches. Turns out, toddlers are just the most predictable viewers, which is probably why the content is targeted for them.

File: readabook.jpg (75KB, 566x480px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 566x480px

>>11507695
>I think it's clear that these videos are not fuelled by clickfarms only
pic related

>>11507877
>it's robots/neural nets
I work with AI and neural nets. No it isn't. They're nowhere near advanced enough to create coherent videos. Not even remotely. It's Pajeets.

File: everything.png (218KB, 383x500px) Image search: [Google]

218KB, 383x500px

>>11507896
People overseas are making the videos, no doubt, but I feel like the AI is writing the screenplay by linking together scenarios like baking a cake or getting electrocuted or something like that. I'll bet it hardly reads in coherent English, something like:
>BABY ELSA DROWNING
>BABY ELSA SWIM WITH SISTER
>SISTER SNEAK OUT OF POOL PRANK
>BABY ELSA SCARED ALONE
>BABY ELSA CANT SWIM
>BABY ELSA DROWN
>JOKER SAVE ELSA
>JOKER SPIDERMAN FIGHT
>etc...
I feel like this wouldn't be too difficult for a computer to figure out using data found by analyzing videos that have a tendency to gain a lot of views very quickly after uploading.

There's probably a fair amount of "creative" freedom given to the actors/editors, but outside of that it's essentially just assembly line work issued by a computer. Or so it seems.

what

>>11506835
>>11506831
>>11506837
>>11506842

I'm convinced YouTube has no real people moderating. They rely on viewers flagging videos.

On that front, all it takes is three guys to flag their videos to screw them up.

>>11506852

Explains why John Oliver, Stephen Colbert, and Trevor Noah get on the trending list every video despite low views, high dislikes, and their shows constantly being threatened to be cancelled for low ratings.

>>11511884
>low views, high dislikes, and their shows constantly being threatened to be cancelled for low ratings

t. trump supporter

I'm pretty sure the reason why those get so many views is either bots or because target audience is children
Commends on ALL videos for children are nonsense. It's either children typing shit accidentally or bots.

Parents instead of parenting just grab their ipad, type in "elsa spiderman" and put it on autoplay (where youtube basically generates ENDLESS stream of videos for the user to watch), and leave the child watching this stuff

This is the same reason why toy channels are so profitable or why those channels are featuring specific characters (e.g. minions, elsa, hulk, etc.)

I'm not even sure if shock content is actually prevalent here. It's probably made in Indian & Chinese animation sweatshops based on randomly generated scenarios, like other anon said, and maybe for one "Minion gets an abortion" video you have 1000 "normal" videos, we just don't see them because shock content brings adult attention.

Also, this shit has been on youtube for years. Why "elsagate" only now?

What am I reading

>>11506831
>/pol/ and /x/ are being retarded
You could've just said that.