In January 2012, it was estimated that visitors to YouTube spent an average of 15 minutes a day on the site, in contrast to the four or five hours a day spent by a typical US citizen watching television.^[108] In 2017, viewers on average watched YouTube on mobile devices for more than an hour every day.^[109]

In December 2012, two billion views were removed from the view counts of Universal and Sony music videos on YouTube, prompting a claim by The Daily Dot that the views had been deleted due to a violation of the site's terms of service, which ban the use of automated processes to inflate view counts. This was disputed by Billboard, which said that the two billion views had been moved to Vevo, since the videos were no longer active on YouTube.^[110]^[111] On August 5, 2015, YouTube patched the formerly notorious behavior which caused a video's view count to freeze at "301" (later "301+") until the actual count was verified to prevent view count fraud.^[112] YouTube view counts once again updated in real time.^[113]

Since September 2019, subscriber counts are abbreviated. Only three leading digits of channels' subscriber counts are indicated publicly, compromising the function of third-party real-time indicators such as that of Social Blade. Exact counts remain available to channel operators inside YouTube Studio.^[114]

On November 11, 2021, after testing out this change in March of the same year, YouTube announced it would start hiding dislike counts on videos, making them invisible to viewers. The company stated the decision was in response to experiments which confirmed that smaller YouTube creators were more likely to be targeted in dislike brigading and harassment. Creators will still be able to see the number of likes and dislikes in the YouTube Studio dashboard tool, according to YouTube.^[115]^[116]^[117]

YouTube has an estimate 14 billion videos^[10] with about 5% of those never having a view and just over 85% of them have fewer than 1,000 views.^[118]

Copyright issues

YouTube has faced numerous challenges and criticisms in its attempts to deal with copyright, including the site's first viral video, Lazy Sunday, which had to be taken down, due to copyright concerns.^[33] At the time of uploading a video, YouTube users are shown a message asking them not to violate copyright laws.^[119] Despite this advice, many unauthorized clips of copyrighted material remain on YouTube. YouTube does not view videos before they are posted online, and it is left to copyright holders to issue a DMCA takedown notice pursuant to the terms of the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act. Any successful complaint about copyright infringement results in a YouTube copyright strike. Three successful complaints for copyright infringement against a user account will result in the account and all of its uploaded videos being deleted.^[120]^[121] From 2007 to 2009 organizations including Viacom, Mediaset, and the English Premier League have filed lawsuits against YouTube, claiming that it has done too little to prevent the uploading of copyrighted material.^[122]^[123]^[124]

In August 2008, a US court ruled in Lenz v. Universal Music Corp. that copyright holders cannot order the removal of an online file without first determining whether the posting reflected fair use of the material.^[125] YouTube's owner Google announced in November 2015 that they would help cover the legal cost in select cases where they believe fair use defenses apply.^[126]

In the 2011 case of Smith v. Summit Entertainment LLC, professional singer Matt Smith sued Summit Entertainment for the wrongful use of copyright takedown notices on YouTube.^[127] He asserted seven causes of action, and four were ruled in Smith's favor.^[128] In April 2012, a court in Hamburg ruled that YouTube could be held responsible for copyrighted material posted by its users.^[129] On November 1, 2016, the dispute with GEMA was resolved, with Google content ID being used to allow advertisements to be added to videos with content protected by GEMA.^[130]

In April 2013, it was reported that Universal Music Group and YouTube have a contractual agreement that prevents content blocked on YouTube by a request from UMG from being restored, even if the uploader of the video files a DMCA counter-notice.^[131]^[132] As part of YouTube Music, Universal and YouTube signed an agreement in 2017, which was followed by separate agreements other major labels, which gave the company the right to advertising revenue when its music was played on YouTube.^[133] By 2019, creators were having videos taken down or demonetized when Content ID identified even short segments of copyrighted music within a much longer video, with different levels of enforcement depending on the record label.^[134] Experts noted that some of these clips said qualified for fair use.^[134]

Content ID

In June 2007, YouTube began trials of a system for automatic detection of uploaded videos that infringe copyright. Google CEO Eric Schmidt regarded this system as necessary for resolving lawsuits such as the one from Viacom, which alleged that YouTube profited from content that it did not have the right to distribute.^[135] The system, which was initially called "Video Identification"^[136]^[137] and later became known as Content ID,^[138] creates an ID File for copyrighted audio and video material, and stores it in a database. When a video is uploaded, it is checked against the database, and flags the video as a copyright violation if a match is found.^[139] When this occurs, the content owner has the choice of blocking the video to make it unviewable, tracking the viewing statistics of the video, or adding advertisements to the video.

An independent test in 2009 uploaded multiple versions of the same song to YouTube and concluded that while the system was "surprisingly resilient" in finding copyright violations in the audio tracks of videos, it was not infallible.^[140] The use of Content ID to remove material automatically has led to controversy in some cases, as the videos have not been checked by a human for fair use.^[141] If a YouTube user disagrees with a decision by Content ID, it is possible to fill in a form disputing the decision.^[142]

Before 2016, videos were not monetized until the dispute was resolved. Since April 2016, videos continue to be monetized while the dispute is in progress, and the money goes to whoever won the dispute.^[143] Should the uploader want to monetize the video again, they may remove the disputed audio in the "Video Manager".^[144] YouTube has cited the effectiveness of Content ID as one of the reasons why the site's rules were modified in December 2010 to allow some users to upload videos of unlimited length.^[145]

Moderation and offensive content

YouTube has a set of community guidelines aimed to reduce abuse of the site's features. The uploading of videos containing defamation, pornography, and material encouraging criminal conduct is forbidden by YouTube's "Community Guidelines".^[146]^{[better source needed]} Generally prohibited material includes sexually explicit content, videos of animal abuse, shock videos, content uploaded without the copyright holder's consent, hate speech, spam, and predatory behavior.^[146] YouTube relies on its users to flag the content of videos as inappropriate, and a YouTube employee will view a flagged video to determine whether it violates the site's guidelines.^[146] Despite the guidelines, YouTube has faced criticism over aspects of its operations,^[147] its recommendation algorithms perpetuating videos that promote conspiracy theories and falsehoods,^[148] hosting videos ostensibly targeting children but containing violent or sexually suggestive content involving popular characters,^[149] videos of minors attracting pedophilic activities in their comment sections,^[150] and fluctuating policies on the types of content that is eligible to be monetized with advertising.^[147]

YouTube contracts companies to hire content moderators, who view content flagged as potentially violating YouTube's content policies and determines if they should be removed. In September 2020, a class-action suit was filed by a former content moderator who reported developing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after an 18-month period on the job.^[151]^[152]^[153]

Controversial moderation decisions have included material relating to Holocaust denial,^[154] the Hillsborough disaster,^[155] Anthony Bourdain's death,^[156] and the Notre-Dame fire.^[157] In July 2008, the Culture and Media Committee of the House of Commons of the United Kingdom stated that it was "unimpressed" with YouTube's system for policing its videos, and argued that "proactive review of content should be standard practice for sites hosting user-generated content".^[158]

In June 2022, Media Matters, a media watchdog group, reported that homophobic and transphobic content calling LGBT people "predators" and "groomers" was becoming more common on YouTube.^[159] The report also referred to common accusations in YouTube videos that LGBT people are mentally ill.^[159] The report stated the content appeared to be in violation of YouTube's hate speech policy.^[159]

An August 2022 report by the Center for Countering Digital Hate, a British think tank, found that harassment against women was flourishing on YouTube.^[160] In his 2022 book Like, Comment, Subscribe: Inside YouTube's Chaotic Rise to World Domination, Bloomberg reporter Mark Bergen said that many female content creators were dealing with harassment, bullying, and stalking.^[160]

Conspiracy theories and far-right content

YouTube has been criticized for using an algorithm that gives great prominence to videos that promote conspiracy theories, falsehoods and incendiary fringe discourse.^[161]^[162]^[163]^[164] According to an investigation by The Wall Street Journal, "YouTube's recommendations often lead users to channels that feature conspiracy theories, partisan viewpoints and misleading videos, even when those users haven't shown interest in such content. When users show a political bias in what they choose to view, YouTube typically recommends videos that echo those biases, often with more-extreme viewpoints."^[161]^[165] After YouTube drew controversy for giving top billing to videos promoting falsehoods and conspiracy when people made breaking-news queries during the 2017 Las Vegas shooting, YouTube changed its algorithm to give greater prominence to mainstream media sources.^[161]^[166]^[167]^[168]

In 2017, it was revealed that advertisements were being placed on extremist videos, including videos by rape apologists, anti-Semites, and hate preachers who received ad payouts.^[169] After firms started to stop advertising on YouTube in the wake of this reporting, YouTube apologized and said that it would give firms greater control over where ads got placed.^[169]

University of North Carolina professor Zeynep Tufekci has referred to YouTube as "The Great Radicalizer", saying "YouTube may be one of the most powerful radicalizing instruments of the 21st century."^[170] Jonathan Albright of the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia University described YouTube as a "conspiracy ecosystem".^[163]^[171]

Use among white supremacists

Before 2019, YouTube took steps to remove specific videos or channels related to supremacist content that had violated its acceptable use policies but otherwise did not have site-wide policies against hate speech.^[172]

In the wake of the March 2019 Christchurch mosque attacks, YouTube and other sites like Facebook and Twitter that allowed user-submitted content drew criticism for doing little to moderate and control the spread of hate speech, which was considered to be a factor in the rationale for the attacks.^[173]^[174] These platforms were pressured to remove such content, but in an interview with The New York Times, YouTube's then chief product officer Neal Mohan said that unlike content such as ISIS videos which take a particular format and thus easy to detect through computer-aided algorithms, general hate speech was more difficult to recognize and handle, and thus could not readily take action to remove without human interaction.^[175]

In May 2019, YouTube joined an initiative led by France and New Zealand with other countries and tech companies to develop tools to be used to block online hate speech and to develop regulations, to be implemented at the national level, to be levied against technology firms that failed to take steps to remove such speech, though the United States declined to participate.^[176]^[177] Subsequently, on June 5, 2019, YouTube announced a major change to its terms of service and further stated it would "remove content denying that well-documented violent events, like the Holocaust or the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, took place."^[172]^[178]

In June 2020, YouTube was criticized for allowing white supremacist content on its platform for years after it announced it would be pledging $1 million to fight racial injustice.^[179] Later that month, it banned several channels associated with white supremacy, including those of Stefan Molyneux, David Duke, and Richard B. Spencer, asserting these channels violated their policies on hate speech.^[180]

Misinformation and handling of the COVID-19 pandemic

Multiple research studies have investigated cases of misinformation in YouTube. In a July 2019 study based on ten YouTube searches using the Tor Browser related to climate and climate change, the majority of videos were videos that communicated views contrary to the scientific consensus on climate change.^[181] A May 2023 study found that YouTube was monetizing and profiting from videos that included misinformation about climate change.^[182] A 2019 BBC investigation of YouTube searches in ten different languages found that YouTube's algorithm promoted health misinformation, including fake cancer cures.^[183] In Brazil, YouTube has been linked to pushing pseudoscientific misinformation on health matters, as well as elevated far-right fringe discourse and conspiracy theories.^[184] In the Philippines, numerous channels disseminated misinformation related to the 2022 Philippine elections.^[185] Additionally, research on the dissemination of Flat Earth beliefs in social media, has shown that networks of YouTube channels form an echo chamber that polarizes audiences by appearing to confirm preexisting beliefs.^[186]

In 2018, YouTube introduced a system that would automatically add information boxes to videos that its algorithms determined may present conspiracy theories and other fake news, filling the infobox with content from Encyclopædia Britannica and Wikipedia as a means to inform users to minimize misinformation propagation without impacting freedom of speech.^[187]^[188] In 2023, YouTube revealed its changes in handling content associated with eating disorders. This social media platform's Community Guidelines now prohibit content that could encourage emulation from at-risk users.^[189]

In January 2019, YouTube said that it had introduced a new policy starting in the United States intended to stop recommending videos containing "content that could misinform users in harmful ways." YouTube gave flat earth theories, miracle cures, and 9/11 truther-isms as examples.^[190] Efforts within YouTube engineering to stop recommending borderline extremist videos falling just short of forbidden hate speech, and track their popularity were originally rejected because they could interfere with viewer engagement.^[191] In July 2022, YouTube announced policies to combat misinformation surrounding abortion, such as videos with instructions to perform abortion methods that are considered unsafe and videos that contain misinformation about the safety of abortion.^[192] Google and YouTube implemented policies in October 2021 to deny monetization or revenue to advertisers or content creators that promoted climate change denial.^[193] In January 2024, the Center for Countering Digital Hate reported that climate change deniers were instead pushing other forms of climate change denial that have not yet been banned by YouTube.^[194]^[195]

Following the dissemination via YouTube of misinformation related to the COVID-19 pandemic that 5G communications technology was responsible for the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 which led to multiple 5G towers in the United Kingdom being attacked by arsonists, YouTube removed all such videos linking 5G and the coronavirus in this manner.^[196]

In September 2021, YouTube extended this policy to cover videos disseminating misinformation related to any vaccine, including those long approved against measles or Hepatitis B, that had received approval from local health authorities or the World Health Organization.^[197]^[198] The platform proceeded to remove the accounts of anti-vaccine campaigners such as Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Joseph Mercola.^[198] YouTube had extended this moderation to non-medical areas. In the weeks following the 2020 United States presidential election, the site added policies to remove or label videos promoting election fraud claims;^[199]^[200] however, it reversed this policy in June 2023, citing that the removal was necessary to "openly debate political ideas, even those that are controversial or based on disproven assumptions".^[201]^[202]

Child safety and wellbeing

Leading into 2017, there was a significant increase in the number of videos related to children, coupled between the popularity of parents vlogging their family's activities, and previous content creators moving away from content that often was criticized or demonetized into family-friendly material. In 2017, YouTube reported that time watching family vloggers had increased by 90%.^[203]^[204] However, with the increase in videos featuring children, the site began to face several controversies related to child safety, including with popular channels FamilyOFive and Fantastic Adventures.^[205]^[206]^[207]^[208]^[209]

Later that year, YouTube came under criticism for showing inappropriate videos targeted at children and often featuring popular characters in violent, sexual or otherwise disturbing situations, many of which appeared on YouTube Kids and attracted millions of views. The term "Elsagate" was coined on the Internet and then used by various news outlets to refer to this controversy.^[210]^[211]^[212]^[213] Following the criticism, YouTube announced it was strengthening site security to protect children from unsuitable content and the company started to mass delete videos and channels that made improper use of family-friendly characters. As part of a broader concern regarding child safety on YouTube, the wave of deletions also targeted channels that showed children taking part in inappropriate or dangerous activities under the guidance of adults.^[214]^[215]^[216]^[217]^[218]^[219]

Even for content that appears to be aimed at children and appears to contain only child-friendly content, YouTube's system allows for anonymity of who uploads these videos. These questions have been raised in the past, as YouTube has had to remove channels with children's content which, after becoming popular, then suddenly include inappropriate content masked as children's content.^[220] The anonymity of such channel raise concerns because of the lack of knowledge of what purpose they are trying to serve.^[221] The difficulty to identify who operates these channels "adds to the lack of accountability", according to Josh Golin of the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, and educational consultant Renée Chernow-O'Leary found the videos were designed to entertain with no intent to educate, all leading to critics and parents to be concerned for their children becoming too enraptured by the content from these channels.^[220] Content creators that earnestly make child-friendly videos have found it difficult to compete with larger channels, unable to produce content at the same rate as them, and lacking the same means of being promoted through YouTube's recommendation algorithms that the larger animated channel networks have shared.^[221]

In January 2019, YouTube officially banned videos containing "challenges that encourage acts that have an inherent risk of severe physical harm" (such as the Tide Pod Challenge) and videos featuring pranks that "make victims believe they're in physical danger" or cause emotional distress in children.^[222]

Sexualization of children and pedophilia

In November 2017, it was revealed in the media that many videos featuring children—often uploaded by the minors themselves, and showing innocent content such as the children playing with toys or performing gymnastics—were attracting comments from pedophiles^[223]^[224] with predators finding the videos through private YouTube playlists or typing in certain keywords in Russian.^[224] Other child-centric videos originally uploaded to YouTube began propagating on the dark web, and uploaded or embedded onto forums known to be used by pedophiles.^[225]

As a result of the controversy, which added to the concern about "Elsagate", several major advertisers whose ads had been running against such videos froze spending on YouTube.^[213]^[226] In December 2018, The Times found more than 100 grooming cases in which children were manipulated into sexually implicit behavior (such as taking off clothes, adopting overtly sexual poses and touching other children inappropriately) by strangers.^[227]

In February 2019, YouTube vlogger Matt Watson identified a "wormhole" that would cause the YouTube recommendation algorithm to draw users into this type of video content, and make all of that user's recommended content feature only these types of videos.^[228] Most of these videos had comments from sexual predators commenting with timestamps of when the children were shown in compromising positions or otherwise making indecent remarks.^[229] In the wake of the controversy, the service reported that they had deleted over 400 channels and tens of millions of comments, and reported the offending users to law enforcement and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.^[230]^[231] Despite these measures several large advertisers pulled their advertising from YouTube.^[229]^[232]

Subsequently, YouTube began to demonetize and block advertising on the types of videos that have drawn these predatory comments.^[233] YouTube also began to flag channels that predominantly feature children, and preemptively disable their comments sections.^[234]^[235]

A related attempt to algorithmically flag videos containing references to the string "CP" (an abbreviation of child pornography) resulted in some prominent false positives involving unrelated topics using the same abbreviation. YouTube apologized for the errors and reinstated the affected videos.^[236]

In June 2019, The New York Times cited researchers who found that users who watched erotic videos could be recommended seemingly innocuous videos of children.^[237]

Russia

In 2021, two accounts linked to RT Deutsch, the German channel of the Russian RT network were removed as well for breaching YouTube's policies relating to COVID-19.^[197] Russia threatened to ban YouTube after the platform deleted two German RT channels in September 2021.^[238]

Shortly after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, YouTube removed all channels funded by the Russian state.^[239] YouTube expanded the removal of Russian content from its site to include channels described as 'pro-Russian'. In June 2022, the War Gonzo channel run by Russian military blogger and journalist Semyon Pegov was deleted.^[240]

In July 2023, YouTube removed the channel of British journalist Graham Phillips, active in covering the War in Donbas from 2014.^[241]

In August 2023, a Moscow court fined Google 3 million rubles, around $35,000, for not deleting what it said was "fake news about the war in Ukraine".^[242]

In October 2024, a Russian court has fined its parent company Google a grand total of 2 undecillion rubles (equivalent to US$20 decillion) for restricting Russian state media channels on YouTube.^[243] The fine imposed by Russia is far greater than the world's total GDP, estimated at US$110 trillion by the International Monetary Fund.^[244] News agency TASS reported that Google is allowed to return to the Russian market only if it complies with the court's decision.^[245] Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov labeled the court decision as "symbolic" and warned Google that it “should not be restricting the actions of our broadcasters on its platform.”^[246]

April Fools gags

YouTube featured an April Fools prank on the site on April 1 of every year from 2008 to 2016. In 2008, all links to videos on the main page were redirected to Rick Astley's music video "Never Gonna Give You Up", a prank known as "rickrolling".^[247]^[248] The next year, when clicking on a video on the main page, the whole page turned upside down, which YouTube claimed was a "new layout".^[249] In 2010, YouTube temporarily released a "TEXTp" mode which rendered video imagery into ASCII art letters "in order to reduce bandwidth costs by $1 per second."^[250]

The next year, the site celebrated its "100th anniversary" with a range of sepia-toned silent, early 1900s-style films, including a parody of Keyboard Cat.^[251] In 2012, clicking on the image of a DVD next to the site logo led to a video about a purported option to order every YouTube video for home delivery on DVD.^[252]

In 2013, YouTube teamed up with satirical newspaper company The Onion to claim in an uploaded video that the video-sharing website was launched as a contest which had finally come to an end, and would shut down for ten years before being re-launched in 2023, featuring only the winning video. The video starred several YouTube celebrities, including Antoine Dodson. A video of two presenters announcing the nominated videos streamed live for 12 hours.^[253]^[254]

In 2014, YouTube announced that it was responsible for the creation of all viral video trends, and revealed previews of upcoming trends, such as "Clocking", "Kissing Dad", and "Glub Glub Water Dance".^[255] The next year, YouTube added a music button to the video bar that played samples from "Sandstorm" by Darude.^[256] In 2016, YouTube introduced an option to watch every video on the platform in 360-degree mode with Snoop Dogg.^[257]