Why Logan Paul Doesn’t Deserve To Be Kicked Off YouTube, According to the CEO
Logan Paul isn’t having the best 2018. Since the very beginning of the new year, the popular, now controversial YouTube star has frequently been in the news due to the extremities of his recent videos. Some people online have expressed the idea that the young vlogger should be removed entirely from the video platform site. But there’s one very influential person who believes otherwise: Susan Wojcicki, YouTube’s CEO. During a recent conference, Wojcicki said that Paul doesn’t deserve to be kicked off her site because he hasn’t done anything to violate his three strikes, saying,
He hasn’t done anything that would cause those three strikes. We can’t just be pulling people off our platform … They need to violate a policy. We need to have consistent [rules]. This is like a code of law.
Susan Wojcicki’s comments were spoken during the Code Media conference in Huntington Beach, CA (via The Verge). She was responding to a question brought up by interviewer Kara Swisher, asking why YouTube hasn’t banned Paul in response to his recent issues on the video platform. Specifically, this comment is addressing two recent videos on social media: the first involving Paul’s visit to Japan, where he filmed a suicide victim’s corpse and later apologized, and another video where he shot a Taser at a dead rat. Just because the videos are considered tasteless, however, doesn’t mean they warrant Paul’s dismissal from YouTube’s services, according to Wojcicki. The YouTube CEO went on to state:
What you think is tasteless is not necessarily what someone else would think is tasteless. We need to have consistent laws, so that in our policies, so we can apply it consistently to millions of videos, millions of creators.
YouTube’s three-strike policy goes into effect whenever a creator’s account violates YouTube’s rules and regulations. Punishable offenses often include violence, explicit sexuality, and copyright violations. The first strike prevents users from accessing select features on their site. The second strike prevents YouTubers from posting new content on their page for two weeks. The third strike is immediate termination. Each strike expires three months after it is issued — assuming you don’t break three in a three month time, of course. There are some people who believe the site isn’t doing enough to enforce these rules, but according to SusanWojcicki, it’s all about even-handed fairness, as she noted “we try our very best to be consistent” with those using YouTube.
Regardless of what you think about the matter, these official comments give people a firm and solid understanding of how YouTube as a company views the situation. This is most certainly not the first time Susan Wojcicki and other people who work for YouTube have been asked to address videos considered offensive, inappropriate, disruptive, demeaning and/or disturbing videos on their site. But that’s not to say that Paul isn’t being punished. YouTube has recently suspended advertising revenue from Paul’s account — if only temporarily — citing his “recent pattern of behavior” as the source of the decision. Whether that’s a fitting penalty or not is a matter worth discussing, and we’ll see how the whole issue shakes out in the coming weeks.