Talk:Social impact of YouTube

This article was nominated for deletion on 11 November 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Google Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Google, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Google and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GoogleWikipedia:WikiProject GoogleTemplate:WikiProject GoogleGoogle articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Google To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Articles for most of the other products listed here and here. Assess : All articles in the Category:Unknown-importance Google articles and Category:Unassessed Google articles using the project's assessment scale Expand : Google Mapathon, Google Talkback Maintain : This WikiProject Merge : Google mobile services into List of Google products Stubs : Category:Stub-Class Google articles and Category:Google stubs Update : List of features in Android and Gmail interface#Product integration. Update logos of Google Marketing Platform products Other : Add more stuff to this to do list if you like! (click here...) create: Help the Google article for a good article status Improve the Outline of Google Get more members using : {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Google/Invite Members}} Infobox Images with transparent areas needing a different background color Internet culture High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Internet culture To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles Expand : Pick an article from here or here Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images Stubs : All stubs are located here Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}} See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention Sociology This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Danimk. Peer reviewers: Lwax314, Camomileviolet.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Felicsmith.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mikaelanguyen, Baiagui, Maddieramirez17, Ng5845.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 18 March 2019 and 10 May 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: BennettKnows.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 May 2019 and 12 July 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cias nina1985.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's certainly had an impact in terms of crime and questionable police brutality. Such as University of Florida Taser incident, UCLA Taser incident, and, more recently, the assault on the NYC Critical Mass rider. Any thoughts? -- MacAddct  1984 ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the freak popularity (and perhaps infamy) of "Chocolate Rain" is any indication, Tay Zonday definitely deserves a mention on this page. Especially since "Chocolate Rain" is not his only musical creation... --Luigifan (talk) 21:19, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't dispute that Youtube is taken notice of by politicians, business, etc, I think it is more of a US/UK/West Europe thing. To pretend that the activities of a John Smith in those countries is comparable to say ... an average person in India or China is quite silly. To that end, I'll edit the intro a bit.

Plus, the article and the subject itself is more like a "wow, I use Youtube and know about it, and now I can see the things I discovered from Youtube in real life now" feeling article from end-users (again US/UK/WE based).

• Deals exclusively with English-speaking "Internet celebrities"
• Seems to exist solely to be an extra article in "Related articles" in the Youtube template —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.90.96.198 (talk) 07:09, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Weasel words aplenty.
• See WP:BIAS.

While there are plenty of references, which I take as a preemptive rebuttal of any OR claims, it still seems to show things from a Youtube user's pov.

118.90.96.198 (talk) 06:44, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Yet another comment) Also, "effect on society" or "social impact" could be a misnomer. What prevents Youtube users discovering each other on the Internet then arranging to do a Real World thing? That is pretty much what this boils down into, and so cannot be attributed to Youtube alone: its more of a result of what the Internet is, a medium of communication. Youtube's involvement has been severely overstated.

"Social impact" really should be reserved for things which change the way (important things) in society work, such as politics. In that respect video sharing websites, of which Youtube is just one, may be mentioned, but in the long run this article should be distilled down to something in Internet#Social impact. 118.90.96.198 (talk) 06:55, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah this topic has so much potential but the current article is severely dissapointing. 67.9.148.47 (talk) 23:42, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hey everyone

shouldn't be this vid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5P6UU6m3cqk&NR=1) in the TOP 15 ranking?

Max --134.102.71.76 (talk) 13:22, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added sad that a vid had to go unnoticed for a while before it go its recognition.74.234.21.245 (talk) 04:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The song (on YouTube at [1]) currently says "This video is private". It is a mystery what has happened to it, and it is not in the all-time charts either. Can anyone help? The article may have to remove the song from the charts if it remains this way.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:11, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Girlfriend" is now showing as "This video has been removed by the user." It looks like the end of the road for one of YouTube's most famous videos, and the article should be updated to reflect this. What is annoying is that no reason is given for the removal, and a Google search offered no help on this either.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 21:13, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The video is now up, with its original views. Strange.74.234.21.245 (talk) 07:58, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Someone replaced some of the links to the vid with a like to this: Rage Against the Machine Testify Dubstep Remix Someone fix it.68.218.148.23 (talk) 00:35, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it. Someone needs to keep watch over this page because of much hidden vandalism. 71.14.37.151 (talk) 16:17, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This link, placed as a source, shows something else. [2]

1 - barbie girl - aqua (32,398,394 Total Views)

2 - High School Musical - Bop to the Top (30,187,781 Total Views)

and so on

What happens?

Sorry, i messed up, these numbers are referring to Brazil.

---

Even so, the list of top 15 contains errors. [3]

1- Lady Gaga - Bad Romance

2- Charlie bit my finger - again !

3- Evolution of Dance

4- Pitbull - I Know You Want Me (Calle Ocho)

5- Miley Cyrus - 7 Things

6- Hahaha

7- Miley Cyrus - Party In The U.S.A

8- Jeff Dunham - Achmed the Dead Terrorist

9- Lady Gaga - Just Dance ft. Colby O'Donis

10- Lo que tú Quieras Oír

11- Justin Bieber - Baby ft. Ludacris

12- Susan Boyle - Singer - Britains Got Talent

13- Miley Cyrus - The Climb - Official Music Video

14- Timbaland - Apologize (feat. One Republic)

15- Vanessa Hudgens Say Ok Music Video

Where the heck did the list go? -Mike

Further to November's Articles-for-Deletion discussion (here), I think the content of this article should be limited to the impact YouTube has had outside of YouTube. Conversely, content that relates to things inside YouTube (such as upload process, revenue sharing, YT Gatherings, video rankings) should be removed as not being relevant to the social impact of YouTube that is the subject of this article. Please comment below (Agree or Disagree with reasons); otherwise I'll begin this rather large pruning task, and add content that actually fits the article title. — RCraig09 (talk) 18:54, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Supplemental comment. Absent any objection or discussion, I plan to remove the large amount of content, about a third of the article, that doesn't pertain to YouTube's impact outside YouTube. No offense to earlier editors is intended; however: That soon-to-be-deleted content might belong either in the main YouTube article or in its own article, but not here. — RCraig09 (talk) 18:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Supplemental comment. Sections not describing social impact have now been removed (2014-01-05). I further think that most of the content in the "Individuals reaching wide audiences" section should be deleted, especially if it only shows a YouTuber's accomplishments on the website. Much clean-up is needed. — RCraig09 (talk) 23:01, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Deleted content. In the absence of objection over three weeks, I've just deleted all bare mentions of YouTuber "accomplishments". Some of that content might belong in other articles, but not here. No hard feelings? —RCraig09 (talk) 05:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Belated thanks. Kudos to previous editors of this article and the main YouTube article, who provided several good sources that contributed substantial content to the current version of this article. —RCraig09 (talk) 18:39, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Doing the research for the material I've added since 26 Dec 2013 to form the current 2014-01-17 version, I saw that some commentators wrote about specific YouTube videos but described them using broader language (examples: online video, the Web, the Internet, etc.), raising the issue of whether to rename the article more broadly. The article should definitely focus on video sharing sites to exclude videos that, for example, CNN posts to cnn.com (maybe choose "Social impact of video sharing websites"). Please state your preferred title(s) below and discuss, to see if there's any consensus to change. —RCraig09 (talk) 05:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Social impact of video sharing websites. My suggestion, per above, to get discussion rolling. ("Social impact of the Internet" and "Social impact of social media" are too broad.) —RCraig09 (talk) 05:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Looking for other editors' feedback. Please comment below; otherwise I plan to move (rename) the article to "Social impact of video sharing websites". —RCraig09 (talk) 21:02, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On talk pages User talk:Snamigohar46 and User talk:Auderpoprescue I've described the problems with recent submissions, apparently under Education Program:University of California, San Diego (UCSD)/Comm 106I: Internet Industries (Spring 2014). If the editors don't drastically pare back and properly focus their lengthy new content, I plan to restore the article to its former state. (Similar Edit Requests have been made at Talk:YouTube.) To the students involved here: you can state your intentions below, or ask questions, to avoid misunderstandings. —RCraig09 (talk) 12:16, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To UCSD students: by returning this article to its former state, I'm not trying to dissuade you from making serious contributions to Wikipedia. If you want to contribute to this article for its own sake and not just as part of a class assignment, I suggest you start with a small addition—possibly one or two very tightly focused sentences that closely describe what a reliable reference says about the social impact of YouTube. Of course, be sure to insert it at a proper point in the article. —RCraig09 (talk) 03:57, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Overall the information seems to be very helpful and positive towards Youtube and its impact towards social media. I admit some topics were a little wordy and the section about “Posting Videos as a Livelihood” was too short in my opinion because there are a lot of people who have either made a career by starting out with Youtube, or posting videos regularly is their career and mentioning some of those people would have been more positive in terms of how these Youtubers impact social media. Other than that, the information is good and it’s interesting what their reference links might be which gives reason to explore them for more information and for credibility purposes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.174.139.213 (talk) 21:31, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article overall is written very well and contains mostly just factual evidence, however that is not to say there were not any issues. In the last two sections of this wikiarticle the main focus is primarily on the music industry and not any of the other corporations that use YouTube to promote their businesses. It would have been nice to see some more incorporation of how major television companies changed because of the inclusion of YouTube in their brand. Another thing that could vastly improve this article is the inclusion of brands and information from around the world. This article is dominated from facts that come strictly from America and American business, therefore it doesn't truly capture the broadness of YouTube as a company. One thing that would have backed up information in this article would be the inclusion of information from the different YouTube headquarters sprinkled throughout the world, as well as how it impacted their society. There was some incorporation within the text, however, having a bit more could ensure a fully developed grasp on all the concepts addressed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.174.150.163 (talk) 08:34, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to 104.174.n.n: You've made some perceptive observations. If you are aware of specific reliable independent references that could be the source of valid content, you can try editing the article yourself, or simply make an "Edit request" here on the talk page (be sure to cite the reference(s)). Limit your suggestions to YouTube's social impact, because this article is not about YouTubers or what happens inside YouTube. —RCraig09 (talk) 15:31, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, the article also missed out on the opportunity to explain the impact on advertising on YouTube.Cias nina1985 (talk) 03:59, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article would benefit by including more recent impacts YouTube has had on different aspects of our society. For instance, there could be a section that cites articles that speak about whether YouTube still has the power to shift people's perceptions on different topics. Also, given the most recent presidential elections, this article could benefit from the inclusion of sources that talk about any socio-political impacts YouTube has had on the general public. Danimk (talk) 17:47, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You've captured the purpose of this article. The challenge is to find reliable sources that focus on the effect that YouTube, not social media in general, has had. Trump's use of Twitter might inspire a "Social impact of Twitter" article. Existing somewhat-related articles: Sociology of the Internet and Psychological effects of Internet use and parts of Social media. —RCraig09 (talk) 18:22, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering if the changing Youtube policies and procedures should be included. They have an impact on the culture that Youtube has helped established. For example, a very significant video in 2008 was Michael Wesch's presentation to the US Library of Congress, called An Anthropological Introduction to Youtube. Wesch himself is notable enough for his own Wikipedia article, and an address to the Library of Congress about Youtube would warrant mention in this Wikipedia article, but it was missing. The video of that presentation was on Youtube for a time, attracting a few million views, probably establishing a popular understanding of the social impact of Wikipedia. But Youtube copyright procedures saw the video taken down in many jurisdictions, probably leading to a loss of cultural knowledge to some degree. This is true of the Internet generally, which is why the Way Back Machine, and the Internet Archive exists. But Youtube and Google seem less concerned with preserving objects of social and cultural significance on their channels. Their policies and procedures have an impact Leighblackall (talk) 01:29, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Late reply to Leighblackall since I didn't see your comment (which had been improperly placed at top of talk page):

I added two sentences of textual content, one quote, an external link, and two references concerning Wesch, in (I believe) early 2017. Concerning "YouTube policies and procedures" we would need reliably sourced information on how those policies and procedures had a social impact outside the website itself. —RCraig09 (talk) 05:51, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm doing a project for my philosophy course in college right now, and, after speaking with my professor, have come up with some additional information we think is both relevant and beneficial to this article. Under "Direct effect on world events," I am adding a section titled "Effect on violence in the U.S." Likewise, under "Reaching wider audiences," I am planning on adding a section called "Posting videos as a livelihood." Please feel free to give me any insight/feedback on these two sections once I post them!Danimk (talk) 16:31, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Danimk. The first thing I note is that the two sections just added, are several times longer than they should be. They go into far too much explanatory detail, rather than objectively stating what is relevant to the article, namely, what the social impact of YouTube has been. For example, some of the descriptive material added to the ...Livelihood subsection is duplicative of what's already in the section, and any new material should "fit" into the existing article. Also, some of the material (like the vague statements about "other social media platforms" and Casey Neistadt) is altogether irrelevant to YouTube's social impact outside YouTube itself, and should be deleted altogether. If you're seriously intending this to survive on Wikipedia, you'll have to include the sources (footnotes) here and not merely link to your own page. I strongly suggest you make appropriate reductions yourself since you presumably know the source material already. —RCraig09 (talk) 19:00, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article would benefit from adding some more examples of the impact YouTube has had on society. It would definitely help if there were more recent examples of the impacts to make the article more relevant. It would be interesting to include the many different aspects of which YouTube has effected our society, such as political, spiritual, cultural, etc. Also, expanding the "YouTube as a Livelihood" section would also help to improve this article, and would make it more relevant due to how many people do make a living from posting YouTube videos as their full-time career. Felicsmith (talk) 17:08, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very well thought out draft. Great sources you have found and a good amount of information to put into this article. ZaneNorris15 (talk) 21:02, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you guys are contemplating actually adding content to this article, please first read the second paragraph in the above section "Adding new info". It may prevent a lot of needless work on everyone's part. —RCraig09 (talk) 21:32, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've just reverted the newly added section. Please read my edit summary. The main issues are: not using reliable sources (see WP:RS), and placing a bunch of unrelated material in a single blob of a new section whose scope is as broad as this entire Wikipedia article! If you want to contribute items to this article, do so in respective pertinent sections and cite a reliable source for each new item of content. Also, learn about inline citations (see Template:Citation). —RCraig09 (talk) 20:59, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think there may be some information on this page that will be useful for a draft currently being made Draft:YouTuber. I'm not sure on the policy of this, should the information be copied over with attribution or are multiple pages covering the same information not allowed like that. In other words can only small sections be transferred? Alduin2000 (talk) 19:09, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To Alduin2000: I don't know of any "rule" about "copying" or not-"copying". For most purposes, each Wikipedia article is independent. You definitely don't need to "attribute" to another Wikipedia article but, as always, all content in your new article should be reliably sourced to sources outside Wikipedia itself (see WP:RS) — in case the earlier article is changed, moved, or deleted.

It's to be expected that some content will be in more than one Wikipedia article, though two articles that as a whole are comparable or equal in scope should be merged. Important to your particular case: take a look at the existing articles List_of_YouTubers and List of most-subscribed YouTube channels, to avoid duplicated effort. I'm not sure your concept of "YouTuber" as a separate entity can be isolated into its own article. You might visit Wikipedia:Teahouse to ask basic questions: maybe they'll save some effort or spare you some frustration! —RCraig09 (talk) 20:22, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@RCraig09: Actually attribution to other Wikipedia articles is required when it is copied over, see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thanks anyway, maybe it is better to ask in the teahouse. Alduin2000 (talk) 20:54, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, @Alduin2000: I didn't realize there was such an affirmative suggestion in the policies. I am a great fan of the concept of comprehensive edit summaries, in any event. Good luck! —RCraig09 (talk) 21:20, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Education and proliferation of knowledge^[1]

Everything in this section is relevant to the topic exploring the ways in which Youtube has impacted the ways in which we process information and how that has been used to create platforms to share knowledge effectively. I do wish that the article explored this topic a little more providing a better understanding of Youtube and learning. Although the article is neutral, TED Talks are referenced throughout the section questioning the writers bias based on the consistent reference.

All the citation links work with the source directly supporting the claims made in the article. However, while each of the sources is appropriate in addressing the topic, I would do further research using sources that are more reliable.

There is a lot going on behind the scenes! This article received a C-class rating on the quality scale with mid-level importance. A lot of conversation surrounding the article involves the validity of the sources/links with a desire for more information and better sources. Interestingly, there's a lot of cross-examinations along with corrections in statistics and lists. This article is within the scope of WikiProject Google (a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Google and related topics on Wikipedia). In class, we've discussed the impact of technology on society with a focus on communication whereas the article slightly discusses this topic.

BennettKnows (talk) 00:07, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

BennettKnows, I see that this is your second day on Wikipedia and that the foregoing comment is your ninth edit on the website. Are you doing a school project? Be aware that TED Talks is not just a single source; for reliability purposes, each speaker would be judged on his or her own merits, and using a few TED Talks as references does not raise questions about "the writer's bias" if, as your note, the article is neutral. Separately, the statistics and lists etc that you mention, were removed from the article in a major overhaul in early 2014 (!) because they did not relate to YouTube's social impact outside the website itself; accordingly your final paragraph doesn't seem to be pertinent to the article in its present, corrected form. —RCraig09 (talk) 05:39, 27 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]