YouTube collecting data on kids?

[R-Rated]

http://money.cnn.com/2018/04/09/technology/youtube-ftc-kids/index.html

Wheeww, I am glad YouTube was freed up from paying small creators. Gives them plenty of time for data mining.

By the way, since "toy" is not only a search term that is targeted, but also what some folks seem to think of motorcycles, who will be adding this tag to their videos?

 

[Hippo-Drones]

I'm not sure how YouTube in this instance has really done anything wrong, to have an account you have to be over 13yrs old, so for a kid under that age, YouTube isn't mining data on a kid, but on an anonymous viewer which really does not get them a demographic they can make money from.

What would you have YouTube do different in this example?

 

[Javiyellow]

There's always going to be kids who say they're above 13 and make an account but there isn't much youtube can do to stop this. They specifically say it's not for kids but they can't stop kids from using it and if the toy tag is making money it could be because of kids searching for them or parents seeing if its a good toy for their kid. It's impossible to tell but if it's making money why not exploit it.

 

[ulijonroth]

My son is 8 yrs old and watches games and cartoons via Youtube. He doesn't have an account but his mother does.
Let's pretend that you are harvesting data of a 38 yrs old woman, who is mostly watching cartoons and Mine "f'in" craft game videos. You can target accounts like these, saying that "you're not directly advertising to a child" by claiming that the account belongs to that single mom, but your algorithm surely knows that there's a kid watching those ads.

So, if we're talking about the "big data sh*t", Google can easily know that which account is mainly used by a child.

 

[Hippo-Drones]

but in that instance, surely the fault lies with the mother, who has electronically signed the YouTube user agreement, it is her who is allowing her child to use her login.

 

[SighBored]

If they are watching anonymously (not signed in), there's still data. If they are watching off parent's login, there's still data. If they are watching using fake account, there's still data.

Either way there's already legal clause stipulation by YT so anyone that uses YT are bound to the clause and by using YT services you are deemed in agreement of the legal stipulation anyway.

Maybe YT should ban creators that review toys/kids products, or animators? Now doesn't that sound stupid?

We live in a digital world where data is gold, as long as you are not blatantly sharing personal info I don't see the issue. Gathering viewing patterns or interest to target ads for the viewer is not infringing on personal data.

 

[ulijonroth]

but in that instance, surely the fault lies with the mother, who has electronically signed the YouTube user agreement, it is her who is allowing her child to use her login.

That's the point. On the paper, according to law, YT has no responsibility on this case, and I know that this is the parent's (on this example, my ex-wife's) fault.

But still, Google may still use the data, with allegedly extrapolating the user's behaviour. This is nearly the same on every social media giant. They collect the data, and use this for manipulating the users. We all know it, and most of us willingly share our information on these places.