Sam Oh, the Vice President of Marketing at Ahrefs, recently shed light on this capability. Oh disclosed that a video posted by Ahrefs was flagged by YouTube for a rather unexpected reason. The video in question displayed a snippet from a book, and within that snippet was the name “Donald Trump.”.

Following this, YouTube flagged the video under its “Election advertising in the United States” clause. Ahrefs was subsequently prompted to “Review and fix ads that violate ads policy to update the status of your campaign.”

  • Willowtree2222@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Semi-related but it drives me crazy that there can be non-censored swearing in a video but the subtitles have it censored. Imagine being punished for being deaf

    • JohnnySledge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I wonder if the scenario with spoken vs printed words getting treated differently is due to the differences in accuracy of google’s audio and ocr technology. Hi-res text images makes ocr very good at deciphering between grape and rape but with audio it may not be as good.

      Similarly, I wonder if the fact that google is autogenerating subtitles for videos makes a difference. When it’s spoken in a video it’s not something they’ve produced but when it’s in subtitles they have generated it is something they produced and could somehow open themselves up to legal issues? Regardless it’s still unfortunate that YouTube is forcibly censoring subtitles.