YouTube has a nasty habit of demonetizing LGBTQ content creators’ videos. They’ve been doing it for years, and haven’t improved at all. Demonetization means they can’t make money off of their videos through advertising if they’re about LGBTQ content. For many LGBTQ vloggers, the lives and problems facing LGBTQ people today are central themes of their content. YouTube makes it impossible for these people to make money.
YouTube claims this isn’t intentional or discrimination. However, numerous LGBTQ users have noticed that using certain LGBTQ phrases in their video titles or descriptions—even if the videos are identical—causes YouTube to demonetize those videos.
YouTube could be using AI to moderate these videos automatically. Because the world still has many homophobic people, it could notice that videos with those keywords get more reports from homophobes. Because the algorithm doesn’t account for hate, it reinforces it. Yes, AI can be homophobic, racist, and sexist.
YouTube also recently decided to allow homophobic YouTuber Steven Crowder stay on the platform, despite targeted racist and homophobic attacks against a Vox journalist. This upset both the LGBTQ community and YouTube/Google employees.
With these incidents in hand, LGBTQ content creators could have a strong discrimination case against YouTube. But can you sue YouTube for discrimination caused by an algorithm? Will we finally understand if we can hold the creators of AI responsible for discrimination their AI carries out? This case could set a precedent that will change how we moderate content on the web. It could also finally fix YouTube for LGBTQ people.
In This Article:
YouTube’s Discrimination
YouTube has a long history of discriminating against the LGBTQ+ community. Furthermore, they seem to allow hateful anti-LGBTQ comments, videos, and even anti-LGBTQ ads. They even allowed hate groups to target LGBTQ creators with anti-LGBTQ advertisements. There are years of proof of discrimination.
Demonetization and Restricted Mode
Simply including the word “trans” instantly demonetized these videos. The same videos without that word were fine.
Demonetization is the act of flagging a video as “Not suitable for most advertisers.” It means ads won’t display on the video. Ad revenue is often the only source of income through YouTube, without creators finding external sponsorship or selling merchandise.
Restricted mode is a term given to videos that are “unsuitable for children” or run on libraries or school networks. These restricted videos simply won’t show up in results.
As you can imagine, LGBTQ people found that LGBTQ-related keywords, like “Trans” or “Lesbian” can lead to videos automatically ending up as restricted and demonetized. YouTuber Chase Ross was able to prove his videos were automatically demonetized when he uploaded them simply for including the words “trans” or “transgender.” The same videos were demonetized, proving it wasn’t about the content, but the fact that YouTube’s algorithms could flag them as LGBTQ content.
No LGBTQ Ads, “The Gay Thing”
One channel, Glitter Bomb TV, was explicitly told they couldn’t purchase ads for their holiday episode because of “the gay thing.” They have that denial of business in writing. That alone is grounds for a discrimination lawsuit. Their content isn’t sexually explicit, as the Google representative they spoke to claimed. However, it’s obvious that “the gay thing” was the real reason for their ban.
This was a Google employee stating, without argument, that gay YouTubers couldn’t purchase ads on YouTube because they make LGBTQ-related content. They might as well have a sign up that reads “No gays allowed,” to follow suit with other businesses that discriminated in America’s shameful past.
Hateful Comments and No Moderation
LGBTQ people face a lot of hate speech. Constantly, at all points in their lives. Most LGBTQ people have faced bullying over their sexuality or gender identity. They face discrimination in hiring and in holding down a job, as LGBTQ people are less likely to receive interviews for identical résumés. Online, behind the mask of anonymity, people feel comfortable hurling hate speech at LGBTQ people.
You’d think YouTube, like WordPress, Facebook, and soon, Twitter, would allow people to moderate their own comment sections. After all, a channel for helping LGBTQ children discover their place in the world does not want hate speech from literal Nazis in the comments. However, because YouTube is slow to moderate on their own, and because they often don’t ban anti-LGBTQ hate speech at all, these comments sit on channels for days, weeks, or may be permanent.
As a result, many LGBTQ creators turn off commenting on their videos. However, this means they can’t take feedback, answer questions, or engage with their audience. It stifles community, the thing that drives views on YouTube most strongly. Because of this, YouTube, even if they don’t demonetize or restrict a video, is making discrimination against LGBTQ people possible.
The lack of moderation doesn’t end with comments though. YouTube also allows hateful ads to run on LGBTQ people’s pages, without giving them the ability to block certain ads. Hate groups targeted LGBTQ people with homophobic advertising, which shows before or during their videos. Despite being clear hate speech, YouTube not only did not ban the ads, but did not allow content creators to block these ads on their content without blocking all ads.
Once again, YouTube didn’t react to obvious discrimination and hate speech. This is a violation of their own guidelines. They wouldn’t allow LGBTQ people to buy ads because of “the gay thing,” but allowed homophobic ads to run. Then they didn’t let LGBTQ people ban those ads from their videos.
AI Reinforcing Homophobia
Part of the problem is that YouTube’s moderation system is a black box. We have no idea how it works. Only people at YouTube know, and, even then, are likely only knowledgeable about parts of the process. However, we do know that they system uses both humans and AI. That AI could also be part of the problem. AI itself is a bit of a black box. Yes, we can track down the root cause of any “decision” machine learning makes. However, the massive quantity of data it processes makes this difficult and time consuming. The people who made it can observe results and make an educated guess though.
So, for example, if it’s frequently flagging LGBTQ-related content, it could be because they’re taking reports into consideration without taking homophobia into consideration. They’re going off of a dataset that is homophobic. Instead of trying to identify LGBTQ content and LGBTQ users and seeing how they react to the content, they’re just looking at a simplistic data point, something like reports, or thumbs down. They don’t realize that these LGBTQ creators are often targets of homophobic campaigns to report their videos and downvote them.
Even if this only happens to Channel A, looking at the common information in Channel A and Channel B, a machine learning algorithm could assume that they’re both about the same content and that content is controversial. Because it couldn’t identify homophobic bias, it became a tool of homophobes. That means harassment faced by one LGBTQ creator is felt throughout the community.
Suing Digital Moderators?
YouTube made a mistake here. They should have judged content based on its audience. They should take into consideration that women, LGBTQ people, and POC are frequent targets of harassment campaigns. However, because YouTube, Google, and many other tech companies are predominantly white, straight, and cisgender male, they don’t realize how huge the problem of harassment is for these other groups. They don’t think about these problems while creating their products.
YouTube is absolutely liable for their own creations. However, if this class action suit is successful, it would represent a change in the liability we see in the use of AI. Now it’s not just a cost cutting or time saving measure. It’s something that, without human guidance, could become a tool of oppression. If YouTube is found to be liable for it, it’ll change how AI is crafted and used all around the world. It’ll force AI creators to think of all the consequences of their tools. Teams will have to become more diverse, in order to ensure they don’t miss anything important.
We have an opportunity to ensure AI is used safely in the future. This lawsuit has more than just the LGBTQ community riding on it, it also will mean huge things for women, POC, and other marginalized groups often hurt by AI implementations.
YouTube’s Response
“We’re proud that so many LGBTQ creators have chosen YouTube as a place to share their stories and build community. All content on our site is subject to the same policies. Our policies have no notion of sexual orientation or gender identity and our systems do not restrict or demonetize videos based on these factors or the inclusion of terms like ‘gay’ or ‘transgender.’ In addition, we have strong policies prohibiting hate speech, and we quickly remove content that violates our policies and terminate accounts that do so repeatedly.”
– Alex Joseph, YouTube representative
Unfortunately, YouTube’s response just doesn’t ring true. Chase Ross and other LGBTQ content creators were able to prove that videos mentioning gay or transgender keywords couldn’t be monetized. These are all people who have proof that YouTube’s systems have targeted their content for being LGBTQ related. Furthermore, they specifically complain that they cannot moderate their own comments because YouTube isn’t removing hateful anti-LGBTQ comments from their videos. Finally, they recently had a high profile account making racist and homophobic targeted attacks, and that person still has a channel. Not just that they’re allowed to comment, they still have a channel. YouTube has solidified hate at every turn.
YouTube’s response isn’t just hollow, its provably false.
“If they want to be a private company they should tell people, ‘we discriminate'”
This is the big one. You see, in the United States, a lot of discrimination against LGBTQ people is still legal. We face problems with adoption, immigration, housing, and hiring. In many states, it’s legal to torture your children to try to make them straight through “Conversion Therapy” camps. Trans people can’t get their IDs corrected everywhere. The Trump administration supports private businesses discriminating against LGBTQ people, and at least one Supreme Court case verified such discrimination is legal. YouTube’s actual legal problem is that they’re trying to have their cake and eat it too.
YouTube is trying to claim that they do not discriminate against LGBTQ people while simultaneously blatantly discriminating against these groups. A representative went so far as to admit that “the gay thing” was the reason one channel couldn’t buy ads on the platform. This kind of blatant discrimination might actually be legal in our current far-right government. YouTube might be able to get out of a lawsuit if they admitted they discriminate.
However, because they claim not to discriminate, they’re in breach of upholding their end of the terms of service contract between creators and YouTube. As long as YouTube is pretending they’re not discriminatory, while demonetizing LBGTQ channels, blocking their videos, and preventing them from buying ads, they’re liable.
Can A Monopoly Discriminate?
There’s a problem here as well. Around 95% of the video on the web is hosted on YouTube, outside of pornographic content, I’m sure. As a result, YouTube essentially has a monopoly on the product of self-made videos. When they discriminate, people don’t have anywhere else to turn. Sure, there’s Vimeo, but it has neither the community of YouTube, nor the monetization opportunities. The government hasn’t enforced antitrust laws against Google, and, as a result, the company is a behemoth. The U.S. government occasionally allows monopolies to exist, but often regulates them in ways that they would otherwise not regulate. For example, telecoms can’t discriminate based on who’s trying to make a phone call. This is carefully managed via the FCC.
YouTube could find itself facing new regulations. Because it’s a monopoly, one that the government has allowed to exist, they could face regulations from the government. These would include nondiscrimination policies. However, YouTube’s safe. Right now, the political makeup of the Senate, the president, and the Supreme Court either leans right or is extremely far right. As a result, they’ll support discrimination against LGBTQ people.
Class Action Status and How You Can Help
Like spitting in our face. YouTube claims to support the LGBTQ community during Pride, but then approves of hate speech and targeted harassment of LGBTQ people.
The lawsuit is going to be a class action lawsuit that other LGBTQ YouTube content creators can join in on. If you believe you can contribute to the case, reach out to them at rainbowcoalition@divinogroup.net. You can also support the cause on Twitter, Facebook, and Tumblr with the hashtags #LGBTQvsGoogleYouTube, #DontBeEvil, and #BeEqual. Because the government that’s in place now in the U.S. is in favor of this kind of discrimination, the lawsuit may fail. However, in the court of public opinion, YouTube and Google could face blows that damage their business. They’ve worked hard to pretend to not discriminate because they know it would be devastating to their brand. As news spreads, damage to Google’s reputation will be irreversible.
Sources:
- Julia Alexander, The Verge
- Greg Bensinger and Reed Albergotti, The Washington Post
- Christine Fisher, Engadget
- Rachel Kaser, The Next Web
- Trudy Ring, Advocate
- Reiss Smith, PinkNews
- Lauren Strapagiel, Buzzfeed News
- Chelsea Steiner, The Mary Sue