Transcription
I'm about to make a whole lot of people angry with this video while contradicting a bunch of my peers on the platform, but honestly, I don't care anymore because it really just needs to be said. Everybody saw the title. I won't beat around the bush at all. YouTube needs to be banning even more channels compared to what it's doing right now. And the fact that so many regular people and even fellow creators on the platform are getting angry about all of this is genuinely baffling to me.
Here's the context. Every so often, I'm not even going to say commonly, once in a while, YouTube actually does something to genuinely make the platform better. A great example would be the copyright system, which is far from perfect, mind you, but allows fraudulent claims to be disputed by the creator, then requiring a legitimate legal action to be brought against them or the claim gets forced dropped after a certain period of time. It has flaws, yes, but the system that YouTube employs right now in terms of copyright is light years better than it used to be because sometimes they legitimately do something for the genuine benefit of the ecosystem. That's what we're talking about today. An imperfect, largely imperfect, but genuine decision to make the ecosystem better or at least try to.
And yet somehow the narrative is taking shape that the YouTube platform is using AI moderation systems that have unjustly harmed millions of channels in a way that honestly sounds utterly apocalyptic if you listen to the people complaining about it. But I'm here to offer a bit of a different perspective. YouTube is currently suffering a plague. Okay, it's called slop content and it's basically an infestation of low-quality garbage purely for the sake of monetization. A lot of times they focus on the shorts category which is prolific across the platform. But even long-form video is now buried under an avalanche of minimal effort AI-assisted slop trash. So much so that YouTube is actually having to do something about it.
They're called faceless channels. And essentially what they do with very, very slight variation here is either steal content and put a fake voice over it or generate a script in ChatGPT, use 11 Labs to give it audio, and then post it on YouTube with maximum advertising. That is it. That's all they do. Here's where it becomes an issue, however. There is a whole cottage industry of people trying to teach the entire world how to do this. Not that they're even being authentic. They're mostly making up their screenshots and fabricating everything. But anyway, go on Twitter and look up "top niche" and you'll see a never-ending stream of this. Go on YouTube, type the same thing, and you'll be met with a tsunami of copy-pasted garbage about how much money these faceless channels make, how easy it is to make a bunch of them, and how awesome it would be if you did the exact same thing and got rich, too, fast and easy.
It sounds good, right? It sounds amazing. "10 New Faceless AI Niches Nobody Talks About Copy ASAP." "Seven Faceless YouTube Niches That Pay Better Than Your Job." "The Five Best YouTube Shorts Niches That Will Make You Rich in 2026." And lastly, for the purpose of demonstrating how stone-cold obvious the problem has gotten, "$40,512 With One Faceless Shorts Channel By Stealing Content (Full Course)." And here's what the first 36 seconds of that video look like. Please keep in mind the title literally says "by stealing content." And this video has over 600,000 views.
"Hello, my name is Cvis and over the past year I've created this channel that you're looking at right now and like, it's managed to make around 40k so far. But the actual remarkable thing is that these videos take literally less than 10 minutes to make. I'm going to show you exactly how to make these videos. But I want you to understand to actually understand these videos are literally reused videos. I'm taking other people's content and adding voice over which I don't even write. And literally just take the clip, add it to an AI, and the AI writes the script for me. I'm going to show you exactly how to do all that."
I said the word "plague" earlier, so let me justify that. The method that these people use is called "niches," which basically refers to a low-competition, as of yet, relatively undiscovered corner of YouTube, right? In the algorithm or in the content creation scene pertaining to some kind of hyperspecific category. Typically, it could be astrology or magic tricks or World War II stories, anything really. But once you find this niche on the platform, you basically spam the living [ __ ] out of it with AI-generated garbage. That is literally the method.
Subsequently, because the entire premise of this get-rich-quick scheme is to overrun and spam the content directory. Subsequently, once a niche has been initially discovered by one of these losers, it gets covered or discovered rather, or seen even more and faster, spiraling out of control quickly until there's so many of these people spamming videos, the entire niche itself becomes radioactive. You'll actually see these [ __ ] complaining about that very cycle. That is, after they try to get rich by selling courses where they teach you how to get rich on YouTube. Because once a channel gets created and makes, let's say, $40,000 by stealing content or spamming AI trash, once the first one gets made, so many other people try to replicate that immediately. They end up destroying the profitability and viewership for that entire subject. The original creators who populated the category before the spamming losers are drowning in AI slop. The bottom feeders doing it for the AdSense revenue stop seeing their profits, at least not reliably, and eventually they just move on to the next area. That cycle is happening 24 hours a day, 7 days a week across all of YouTube. Little pockets of greedy spammers are cropping up, cannibalizing a category, and then moving on to the next one like an infestation. And just like many of us warned about a very long time ago, it's wrecking YouTube.
However, to their credit, YouTube is actually doing something about this now. It's called the "inauthentic content policy," which is being heavily enforced by AI moderation systems. And even if it's not perfect, because it isn't perfect. Far from it. Even if there's undeserved casualties because of how big the platform has become and because of how big the problem is getting, it is sadly 100% necessary. Just to get this out of the way, there are some very clear issues with the policy overall. Inauthentic content is very poorly defined. It creates way too much gray area, which is why so many people are being tricked into defending this tidal wave of low-effort, low-quality spam creators while they complain about being suspended wrongfully. But even with those imperfections in mind, this is a phenomenal thing for YouTube as a whole to be doing, and they need to do more of it.
This is the part where I make a whole lot of people very, very angry. YouTube has no obligation whatsoever to allow anyone, any one of these channels, monetization. This is not freedom of speech. Okay? People need to understand that, despite what a growing number of others out there seem to be arguing for. This is the partner program. I'm actually inclined to agree that social media platforms, generally speaking, are an extension of the new public square. Thus, your right to have an account could be argued as a kind of right. Or maybe you could delve into the world of freedom of speech. But YouTube creators in the partner program are 1099s. Okay, that's a very specific document. They receive what's called non-employee compensation. That is not a right. The process of becoming a freelancer or an independent contractor, both of which operate under 1099 similar agreements, and then getting paid for it is no one's right. It is a privilege. Nothing more, nothing less. And it's a privilege governed exclusively by YouTube.
In fact, the policy of "inauthentic content" used to be called "repetitious content," and it's been around for a very long time. It's not even new. It's an attempt to protect the platform from the swarm of greedy influencers who merely cut, copy, paste, and spam or steal their way to advertising wealth. Right around April of 2026, that policy, previously called "repetitious content," got a revamp. More specifically, detection of it got a revamp, which led to a mass wave of YouTube channels being terminated, some of them all at once, some of them previously for inauthentic content, sparking reaction videos, outcries about fair treatment, and all sorts of incessant pleas begging YouTube, "Please bring back my totally innocent, high-quality channel. I just do this for fun, but also give me back all the money you stole." That's kind of the vibe that they're putting out there.
Just one problem. Pretty much all of the people that you see complaining about this deserved it. Sure, there's at least a few mistaken examples, but I'm happy to say that most of those people seem to very quickly have the issue remedied because it's a mistake. And again, I don't just expect people to take my word for it. So, let's go through a number of examples. Okay, to do this, anyone can do this, by the way. I opened Twitter and typed "inauthentic content." That's it. Going down the list and clicking on complaints where someone was demanding reinstatement into the partner program because they didn't deserve to be banned.
Okay, let's have a look. "JJ Rich apparently suspended for inauthentic content, which means he can continue uploading if he wants to. He just can't rake in the advertising dollars anymore, which isn't even the best way to monetize on YouTube, by the way, but I'll get to that part later." Here's a look at these videos. "Today, JJ slept without bothering anyone, but Mikey wasn't there because alternate Mikey turned him into himself and is now riding him. But all of this is so that alternate Mikey can be transported inside the longest maze door and he is guarded by two strong orc soldiers." >> "Please like and subscribe. Go to the channel if you like this video."
I'm not going to play a bunch of these right now because they're painfully bad, but I want to genuinely ask, what obligation does YouTube have as a business to monetize this content? Half the videos are extremely similar. It's practically gibberish to be totally honest with these incoherent narratives about long houses and Mikey becoming alternate Mikey. It's brain rot. And yet, the creator is trying to make it sound like it's the Sistine Chapel he painted. What's more, after getting banned for inauthentic content, he goes and makes an entire appeal video, which is an AI avatar, AI voiceover, and a hyper-exaggeration about how bad it is that their appeals were rejected because a real person didn't even take a look, which is hilarious because if everything on your entire channel is AI to begin with, why on earth should a real person waste their time looking at you?
I just want to demonstrate real fast what these people are doing as they make exaggerated emotional appeals on social media because that is the goal here. Let me, let me say the same thing two different ways right now and hopefully that demonstrates. Version number one, okay, to make this video, I recorded my voice. Done. Simple, clear. I turned on a microphone and I recorded my voice. Everybody understands what I'm saying. A small number of words. But now let's do version number two. "In order to make a video, I equalize the levels in my microphone, ensuring pitch-perfect resonance for the audience to understand the words I'm speaking. Then I hand-select the segments of audio, pacing them across storyboards for the betterment of the viewer. After I've dedicated myself to the quality of the finished product, I upload it using a broadband internet connection to my carefully sculpted YouTube channel, making everyone happy in the process. Please unban me. I did nothing wrong." Which one of those two ways of saying the same thing are more accurate?
Here's the cold, hard truth that not a lot of people want to talk about because there's this concept of solidarity on YouTube where if anybody gets banned, "big bad YouTube is to blame." But that's just, that's not how I see this particular issue. Here's the truth. Just because something takes time doesn't make it authentic. Just because something can be described in a complex, fancy way doesn't make it valuable. And when you're talking about a creator who makes borderline gibberish Minecraft AI voiceovers, the fact that they're undesirable for the purpose of running advertisements kind of starts making sense, doesn't it? Big brands don't necessarily want to be attached to brain-dead children's content who were parked in front of an iPad or whoever else is actually watching that garbage because it's wasted advertising. They're not buying anything. So content like this, even if it is still technically advertised on after being suspended from the partner program, content like this is a liability for YouTube. This creator is still capable of posting on the platform. He has damn near 300,000 subscribers. He could pivot, well, should be able to pivot to a subscription model using something like Patreon. He could accept sponsors, but no, none of that because what he makes is garbage. It has no practical value, damn near zero entertainment value even, except for like a toddler maybe, and it's being made purely for the purpose of advertising saturation.
Let's do another example. Quote, "YouTube demonetized my channel with 781,000 subscribers. Every single video starts with my idea, story buildup by me. Clips cutting and arranged by me. All videos are edited by me in Premiere Pro, After Effects, or Adobe Audition. No templates, no auto-edited edit, nothing at all. Yet YouTube decided my content is inauthentic. I submitted an unlisted video appeal showing my entire creative process. The response I got from support, a copy-paste reply that thousands of creators receive word for word. Not one thing specific to my channel. There are so many creators who put so much work into what they do only for YouTube to push them away. I didn't start LightMov X for the money. I started it because it's my passion. 781,000 people subscribed because they genuinely love the content. That's not inauthentic. That's real. At Team YouTube, I'm not asking for special treatment. I'm just asking for one real human to actually look at my channel and my appeal video. 24 days demonetized and counting." End quote.
Wow. It's all about him because his videos start with his ideas and story building that he thought up, right? No. Wrong. This channel is entirely devoted to posting clip edits and short-form segments ripped out purely right from a different, very famous streamer named IShowSpeed, right? Nothing on this channel is original whatsoever. The person almost certainly has no legal claim to the underlying IP. They simply take a few seconds of a famous creator. They slap AI subtitles on it and some music, also more than likely the music that they don't have a license for either. And that's it. Then they monetized this. This person's channel is allegedly the same size as mine, almost 800,000 subscribers. And yet the prospect of being demonetized is being treated like the end of their ability to do something that they quote "started because it's their passion." They didn't start the channel for the money. Except they can still post all they want if it's their passion, but all they care about is the money. Yeah, right. Okay. Sure. Like this person is such a joke.
Another example, Pardesh, where someone is ranting and raving about the nasty legal loophole that YouTube pulled. But let's see what this super high-quality stuff is. "Such a big eagle. What is this? Oh, no. This is a very big problem. Hello Nepal. Yes, brother. Please read this." >> "Nepal and Vietnam. I am coming back to take revenge. You're mysterious creature." >> "I am not able to understand how he got saved." >> "Leave him now. Think how should I kill him?" >> "Let's talk to Mongolia about this." The entire comment section, by the way, is filled with bots. These are not real people. These are not real comments. This is inauthentic material in the most obvious way possible. And I'm already sick of going through all this, so I won't do anymore. But the channel has 450,000 subscribers. If even a tiny fraction of those people were real, the genuine support of what they do for content, right? If anybody actually cared about what they're making, they could pivot to a Patreon model or Locals or SubscribeStar. I don't care which one. There's a hundred of them. And they would likely make even more money than they do right now with advertising because the concept of being attacked by "big bad YouTube" if you actually have a support base rallies that support base behind you. But they don't because they make trash and they don't actually have real people watching them because it's all an advertising grift.
Any of these channels that I just gave as examples should, keyword, should have the ability to bounce back from this and keep earning money through affiliate deals, sponsors, monthly memberships, etc. But they're not because they make the lowest common denominator of content for the lowest common denominator of people. Leading me to the necessary question, why is YouTube expected to give them advertising dollars? What reasonable expectation do we collectively have that a business should somehow be guilted into serving advertisements from their paying clients on AI slop, low-effort spam, and garbage where the collective normative response for anyone who sees it is just rolling their eyes?
Okay, the stuff that these channels make and they're freaking out about being demonetized, not even banned from the platform, just demonetized from the partner program. The stuff that they're freaking out about. When you see it, you'll roll your eyes and you'll click away as fast as possible because it's trash. I have not seen a single legitimate argument yet at all as to why these channels actually deserve to be monetized beyond "the rules are unclear," which is true, by the way. But to that I say, make them clear and then make them even more restrictive.
YouTube was built way back in the day on top of individual people making truly unique, individual pieces of content. And that is amazing. Okay, it's the roots of the platform. It's great. Over time, a massive amount of the content being uploaded has shifted and become derivative, which is also fine to a degree. But the advent of generative AI, we're talking 11 Labs, ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, all these different LLMs. The advent of generative AI is gasoline on what was already kind of a raging fire. YouTube is absolutely drowning in garbage [ __ ]. And the honest effort to curb that, as imperfect as the effort is, has to be understood as necessary, not evil. At least not this time. They have to do this.
Echoing the title, YouTube should demonetize even more channels and faster because taking someone else's work and feeding it through ChatGPT with a fake voice on top afterwards is not worthy of compensation. You don't deserve to earn money for doing that. Taking someone else's content and posting clips of it with AI subtitles is not transformative. All right? Putting a song in the background and these weird, like, hyper-utilized AI subtitles, like feeding it through a program, that is not transformative. And the people that migrate from niche to niche to niche, spamming it into oblivion, are literal parasites. I'm not saying they should have their accounts removed entirely. I'm saying they shouldn't be paid to do that by YouTube advertising. And as soon as YouTube stops paying them, they just disappear regardless. Okay? It was not their passion. It is not something that they actually want to be doing. They spam the platform into the ground and everybody else around them suffers. So get rid of them. I have no sympathy.
Ultimately, taking any sort of pro-YouTube position in the midst of a demonetization wave seems like a very stupid thing for me to be doing, but I'm choosing to do it anyway because the ban wave is a net positive good thing. I sincerely wish that every single right person, it's a very small number, but anyone who has had their channel undeservedly banned or undeservedly demonetized, which does happen, right? Anyone who's going through that, I really hope that they get the decision reversed. I really do. Those people do exist and I empathize with them. But to prevent the strangulation of the entire content ecosystem by a veritable trained army of freeloading spammers and content thieves, drastic action was needed to stop that from drowning out the whole platform. And at least so far, drastic action appears to be what we're getting. So again, it's not good that there's, you know, innocent side-effect casualties or people that are getting demonetized unjustly. That's not a good thing. I'm not saying it is, but it's rare, relatively speaking, and what YouTube is doing is necessary. That's it.
If you disagree, feel free to do so in the comments down below. I'll try to keep an eye out for any legitimate argument as to why these people, generally speaking, deserve to be monetized. But for right now, that's it. If you want to support the channel, there's links down below. A special VPN deal, Locals and Patreon, channel memberships, etc. A whole bunch of different ways. But I'll cut it there and stop rambling. As always, thank you all for watching. Question everything and have a nice night. Down to down.