Reports in todays UK tabloid newspapers indicate that members of the UK parliament are demanding that YouTube cleans up its video network.Kids as young as eight are finding images of porn, violence and horror on internet video sites like YouTube. According to a commons report, one in six schoolchildren has seen "nasty, worrying and frightening" content. It also revealed video sharing sites like YouTube do nothing to protect kids from such content.
The industry standard for removing offensive content is 24 hours, something which is a "shocking" length of time according to the commons culture, media and sport committee.
One way YouTube could clear the site up is have a reporting system where anything over a certain amount of bad reports gets removed from public view until moderators can ensure it should be removed permanently. What do Neowin users think? Have you found porn, violence and horror on YouTube?

Of course this is coming out from the government yet the other day we were talking about teaching sex education to kids as young as 6. Now I have no problem with that but isn't that a bit of a contradiction? Here kids this is sex this is a condom and this is what you will catch for sleeping with a hooker, but now you know you can NEVER ever look at it on the internet until the age of 18.
Lets face it basic rules apply parents, keep the family computer in the living room where the family can keep an eye on what there looking at!
Besides, children should really be supervised when using the computer/Internet.
Exactly!
the concerned mothers are involved because it's them in the videos and they don't want young billy's classmates seeing his mummy naked
hell, why monitor your own kids when you can monitor everyone elses kids
Instead of monitoring the internet parents should start monitoring their own kids.
I think youtube is doing a pretty good job at filtering unwanted content.
I would like to see every image of Rick Astley banned from youtube, though.
I've been wondering why my videos get deleted real fast on youtube too.
I thought I would sign him up an account to enable special child-friendly safety settings.
However, it turns out that YouTube just don't let you have an account if you are 8!!! I suppose that is one way of ignoring the problem.
I set his search up to only do SafeSearches but that setting could easily be lost if a cookie gets deleted.
I agree that there should be some kind of user feedback button to tag a video as adult/explicit/violent/
Luckily my son is well aware of the dangers of the internet (from my chats & they teach him about it at school) and I trust him enough to tell me if he sees something dodgy. It's when he's a teenager and actively searching for dodgy stuff that I may start worrying
LOL.
but just check the top 10 in popularity.
anyways, youtube =/= youporn ^____^
The same group that visit posh homes in WC1 with dungeons so they can get the f*** beaten out of them by some chick in 6 inch heels.
The same politicians that allowed unmonitored immigration which lead to thousands of knocking shops being opened.
They should shut their noise and get on with what they were elected to do, and that is represent the people and not the over way around.
The pr0n on youtube goes as far as a couple of girls snogging and I am sure dudes do it there also, not searched for that anyway.
You have to register and declare you're 18+ to access it anyway.
Ashampoo ClipFinder v1.46 ( I got it free sure it was offered for free and maybe still is) can get you as much of the above from other sites also, do we hear a mention?
Then all the pr0n sites, to which you can download very extreme clips of sexual activity not a patch on youtube's offerings.
These politicians want airtime, I wish them all the success when they resign next week.
Last edited by leesmithg on 31 Jul 2008 - 09:47
Lets clean up these politicians, yes.. the same ones that use Clapham Common to solicit for rent boys and Streatham High Road for hookers.
Lib dem mp wasn't he?
Lets clean up these politicians, yes.. the same ones that use Clapham Common to solicit for rent boys and Streatham High Road for hookers. ]
Erm, he was an F1 boss not a politician
The same politicians that allowed unmonitored immigration which lead to thousands of knocking shops being opened.
Vote for ID cards then?
Some people upload how to vids lol.. teach them 8yr olds a thing or 2... hehehe
As far as i know.. if a kid enters PORN into you tube he will get some mild things... BUT when he enters PORN on google... watch the content counter roll over a few 100,000 every search
This is quite a good idea, it means that "bad" content can be removed quicker, as there would be no need for it to be manually checked before removal from the site. Obviously this has the potential for abuse but it would certainly help.
I do agree though that there is no porn on youtube, but that doesn't mean that all content is appropriate for children. So long as they take the necessary steps to reduce the time 'bad' content is visible on the site i think they are doing what is needed.
This is quite a good idea, it means that "bad" content can be removed quicker, as there would be no need for it to be manually checked before removal from the site. Obviously this has the potential for abuse but it would certainly help.
(clears throat)
THAT IS WHAT YOUTUBES FLAGGING SYSTEM HAS ALWAYS BEEN.
Last edited by yakumo on 31 Jul 2008 - 18:17
THAT IS WHAT YOUTUBES FLAGGING SYSTEM HAS ALWAYS BEEN.
From my understanding (and i may be wrong) the flagging system won't remove a video from the site automatically no matter how many times it's reported. It takes someone reviewing the video manually, and deciding whether it is appropriate or not. The difference from what i am suggesting/backing is that after say 50 reports (number picked from air not saying it should necessarily be this) the video is removed temporarily, until a moderator can review it.
(Again i may be wrong, just giving my opinion on how i believe things to work at the moment)
So, while the parent has the computer in a family room, and is supervising their obviously impressionable 8 year old, checking what they are doing online - they have noticed their child looking at these videos.
Oh wait - I see the problem here...
What are you talking about? We live in a free world where everybody is free to do what they want. Parents have other things to do than take care of those... child's. They did Porn to create those child, but they forgot they had to raise them after. And at 8, they must be old enough hey?
i hate the fact that kids upload videos of the same song but the video is some stupid cartoon or some crap like that!
and then there is the videos that show beheading, pro-terrorism views, and videos that are just lies! (videos where they leave out the reason and things and ppl believe it to be true!
If kids want porn, they'll get it. I doubt kids would be going to youtube for porn, maybe other sites with "tube" in it for pron
Yet another complete waste of time and money by the UK Govt. Combine this with the news about booting people off the net for downloading music and you see a good representation of just how out of touch the people running the show are. There really is no hope.
Oh yeah, these need to stay exclusive for television!
Lots of naughty bits shown there...
Try typing in "horror porn" into google!
I have yet to actually see porn on youtube, a quick search just returns junk and spam. Can someone give me some helpful tips?
OMFG that is shocking, even horrifying! Kids as young as 8 can find all that and more all over the web. In fact, these materials are more accessible on websites other than YouTube. But let's single out YouTube, and put all the blame on them. Parents are innocent. No need to monitor their kid's online activity. Someone else should do it for them. They are busy enough.
Why can't someone make some sort of software or parental control to help prevent this stuff from being seen by kids? WHY?
Oh, right, there is! But it's just easier to blame YouTube. Next we go after Wal-Mart for enabling people to murder each other by selling guns. Then every convenience store for giving people lung cancer by making cigarettes available. Then Microsoft for making Windows which allows people to install "Peer2peer" software, a tool for downloading illegal materials. Then the politicians for not censoring the whole Internet, then the people who invented the Internet, then whoever invented computers...
You know let's save time and sue everyone for everything. It makes as much sense as singling out YouTube for making offending material available online.
Besides, I'd prefer a child of mine to search for porn on youtube than google anyday!
Frankly, you get more porn from MTV
You get more violence from Hollywood
You get more horror from Politics and the News.
Honestly they won't find it if they're not looking for it
And YouTube are quick to remove inappropriate videos. I don't know why people complain when something controversial gets viewed by only a few hundred people. YouTube is the 3rd most visited website in the world! They get billions of visitors every day! Only like 0.000000001% see the video before it's taken off.
Do you know something? They're even quicker to respond when it comes to copyrighted material! I once posted up a video of the new WWE Raw intro ages ago (from the first time it was broadcast), and the vid was taken off in less than 2 minutes from uploading it!
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.