Welcome to AfterElton.com!

Enter your AfterElton.com username.
Enter the password that accompanies your username.
News, Reviews & Commentary on Gay and Bisexual Men in Entertainment and the Media

YouTube and Gay Content

youtube_tv.jpgYouTube recently announced a deal to license content from the BBC. Both companies are great places to find interesting and fun things to watch. However, as YouTube works to become a player in the online video market, I do have one criticism. When I recently tried to open a YouTube clip from the UK show Skins, which was linked by a commenter on AfterElton, I was surprised to read "This video may contain content that is inappropriate for some users as flagged by YouTube's user community." As you may see below, to view the content from the Skins clip one must be 18 years old. I say "may" because occasionally one may circumvent the system by clicking on the clip What's the problem with an age 18 requirement you ask? Well, a few months ago I interviewed Kirby Dick, the director of This Film Is Not Yet Rated, which explores the MPAA rating system for movies (NC-17, R, PG13, etc). The interesting part of the documentary for me was Dick's argument that movies are censored by the MPAA, especially when it comes to gay content. An NC-17 rating can mean economic death for a movie. This is true because retailers and exhibitors may not show the movie. Gay movies are especially hurt when gay sexuality is portrayed in a frank manner. As companies like YouTube grow in cultural importance like Hollywood once did and enforces its rating systems, I hope the participants involved are cognizant of the message they are sending with regard to their treatment of gay content. I want to make it clear that YouTube does have gay themed content for which the age requirement is not a factor. The labeling of the content as inappropriate for those under 18 appears arbitrarily enforced. Every other clip from Queer As Folk is rated age 18 appropriate, but every other clip from Queer as Folk is not. I also want to make it clear that I'm not a free speech purist. The 18 years of age requirement is reasonable in some cases. However, if one is going to use a community standard upon which to judge age appropriateness one should realize the potential for bias against certain groups. This is the point from which one can draw lessons from the MPAA. Our culture acts on us in subtle ways. Community ratings can reflect the same subtle bias that we see around us. Why does this matter? Well, I think it matters primarily because of the ways in which people assimilate information about being gay. People are coming out or questioning at younger and younger ages. They obtain information from different places including entertainment sources like YouTube.
  • Craig Young's blog
  • Login or register to post comments
  • Anonymous's picture

    Thank you for posting this Craig.

    I run groups on youtube, and have long been documenting cases of discrimination against gay content on youtube, and it's quite bad.

    Just a tip of the iceberg
    http://tinyurl.com/3xgttb

    Here are the facts for you:

    -It took youtube one full year to feature a gay blogger, WilliamSledd, who's now a major star on mainstream tv. And it took some of us speaking up about it before minorities of any types started appearing on their feature.

    -Youtube has flagged ALL gay groups, making it impossible for them to appear in the regular list in the "community" section.
    Again, because I was vocal about my own groups they unflagged "Queer TV" and "Queer Music" (which has over 1000 videos)

    -Youtube tricks with their honors system so videos tagged with gay-themed words will not appear in the main lists of "Most Viewed of the Day". Instead, they're relegated to secondary, less often-clicked 'Most Viewed of The Week' or 'The Month. Other videos are not treated the same way.

    I confronted youtube about it, with documented screen caps of a gay video which honored were tampered with, and I never got a response. Instead that resulted in my group being flagged for a month, till I deleted my posts and told my subscribers why I was moving on from youtube.

    So anyone who is having a fairytale image of youtube -and its counterparts sites- know that there's a new battle for equality ahead with those sites. Speak up, and write, that's the only way they make changes.

    Anonymous's picture

    Also, check out this article on afterellen's website http://www.afterellen.com/node/4303 in January about lesbian content screenting on Youtube.

    Anonymous's picture

    ah JW you beat me to it.

    i was also going to say that i'm shocked (well, not really) at the double standard of flagging gay content but allowing posters to say some of the most hateful things in the comments, whether it's a video relating to race or sexuality, and even when it's not even either. my most recent nausea moment was when i was looking at a video linked by afterellen to a bjork and PJ Harvey cover covering Satisfaction. two women singing on a stage elicited comments that included the word "carpetmuncher" in the negative response to the song.

    wtf?

    i know carpetmunching when i see it and there was NONE in that video.

    Anonymous's picture

    It's one of those things that also annoys me about YouTube. It's okay to denigrate gay sexuality,b ut not to experess it.


    Recent Comments