Does YouTube allow videos of animal cruelty?

YES, in practice YouTube allows videos of animal cruelty despite their own policies (as stated by Google online) quite correctly forbidding them. The policy on animal abuse is set out below. The disturbing aspect of this fact is that YouTube allows videos of animal abuse even when the videos are reported by users. It seems that they can’t claim that they are unaware of the videos because there are too many uploads and not enough moderators to check them. Therefore, either YouTube administrators consciously leave animal abuse videos on their website if those videos are ‘successful’, or they are unable to cope with the large number of reported violations.

Perhaps the overriding point is that we can’t be too critical of YouTube because the internet is a largely unregulated capitalist society 😒😎. Google is a public company with shareholders to please. Their primary goal is to maximize profits. Although they might be in breach of contract. The policy (below) which prevents uploading animal abuse videos are terms and conditions of use of YouTube. If YouTube is in breach of their own policy in not removing animal cruelty videos might not this be a breach of contract?

YouTube don't always remove clear examples of reported animal abuse videos
YouTube don’t always remove clear examples of reported animal abuse videos. Image: MikeB
Until September 7th I will give 10 cents to an animal charity for every comment written by visitors. It is a way visitors can contribute to animal welfare without much effort and no financial cost. Please comment. It helps this website too which at heart is about cat welfare.

Google has no legal obligation to remove animal abuse videos on YouTube

I have reported animal abuse videos for ages. I have reported a particular video around 10 times. Zero action. Zero communication. YouTube behaves like the late Queen Elizabeth II. Her policy was “Never complain, never explain”. For YouTube it is “Never explain, never communicate”.

Publicly, YouTube claim that they have removed hundreds of thousands of abusive videos. They probably have but when there are ten times that number being uploaded over a short period of time on an ongoing basis, their actions are inadequate. They know it. They know what they are doing.

The fact is that they are NOT a publisher but a platform for videos (for users), so they have successful argued that they don’t need to take responsibility for the content. That lets them off the hook as I understand the law.

But the law is one thing and morality is another. As is animal welfare. It is no good hiding behind an inadequate legal system which is ill-equipped to deal with internet issues.

Years ago, I said that there needed to be an independent body which managed the internet. Perhaps that might be narrowed down to the social media websites. The patient and ever tolerant but frustrated general public can’t rely on these enormous websites and commercial enterprises to police themselves.

When did that ever work? Capitalists hate policing and they will never police themselves to a sufficiently high level because it will stifle economic growth. They want a free for all. They hate copyright. They hate deleting videos and photos. They want a kind of capitalist anarchy as they are the big boys, and they can dominate in a capitalist anarchy. The survival of the fittest is the motto.

Now I have to plead with Google and YouTube and say PLEASE DON’T PUNISH ME FOR BEING FRANK. Yes, I have to do that.

The policies relevant to animal abuse:

Violent or gory content intended to shock or disgust viewers, or content encouraging others to commit violent acts, is not allowed on YouTube.

Animal abuse content:

  • Content in which humans coerce animals to fight.
  • Content in which a human maliciously mistreats an animal and causes it to experience distress outside of traditional or standard practices. Examples of traditional or standard practices include hunting or food preparation.
  • Content in which a human unnecessarily keeps an animal in poor conditions outside of traditional or standard practices. Examples of traditional or standard practices include hunting or food preparation.
  • Content that glorifies or promotes serious neglect, mistreatment or harm towards animals.
  • Content that shows an animal rescue that is staged and puts the animal in harmful scenarios.
  • Graphic content that features animals and intends to shock or disgust.

Leave a Comment

follow it link and logo