YouTube News

YouTube has recently hidden tags from regular users and as of today from API users as well. This seems to be a move to help eliminate the "Reply Girls" and their ilk. YT's problem is not necessarily with the provocative thumbnails (HotForWords anyone?) but with the "content" these "Reply Girls" are creating. Their MO seems to be make a video response to a popular YTer, copy their tags so that their reply comes up in search and not add any value to any converstion while potentially diverting or distracting views from the original, valuable content. Tags will still remain an important part of YTs search algorithm but the exact content of the tags will only be known to the creators and YT/Google.

Along this vein, YT is also S...L...O...W...L...Y rolling out customizable thumbnails to all monetized partners. Both of these changes are necessary for improving YT's push for better, easier to identify, high-quality content. Keeping tags mostly private and allowing for customizable thumbnails should add to the quality of YouTube overall. Everyone is pumped about the thumbnails, as they well should be. Thumbnails are at least as important as titles. Without the customizable thumbnails we have very little control over what still of our video gets seen in the search results or in the suggested videos column.

With all this, I have been wondering if YT is going to continue to improve "find-ability" since one of the major problems we encounter is with YT's search algorithms. In theory we should see most of our views coming from YT search. Our types are not ones that people randomly come across when they are looking for entertainment. We offer specialized instructions for specific parts. Viewers should not have to take the long way (search, find one video that kind of looks like what they need, see our video in "Suggested Videos" and click on the thumbnail) to find us. They should be able to search in YouTube for the problem and directly find our video. Right now, YT is smart enough to put our channel there for advertising purposes, but none of our videos are near the top of the results.

Ok, time for a real post

Happy Canada Day! Our lovely country is 141 today. I am celebrating by sleeping in, doing laundry and maybe going to the beach or the park. I think we'll be able to see the fireworks from our window, but I know Doodles and C will have a great view. The fireworks are right across the street from their house.

The new job is going well but I'm still not sure sales is for me. I like dealing with people, I like getting out and getting to know my town but I don't like selling things. I've started noticing that now that I have to pay attention to the paper that local journalism leaves something to be desired. Most of the stories that come from our newsroom are not hard-hitting investigations. They are mostly soft, local interest stories about neighbors helping people around the world, or minor grievances. I keep me criticism to myself but it's there. Most of the national news and the international news is written by the wire services. I know that's how it's done in most of the smaller towns, even some cities use wire services.

I have a problem with this...

Sexually active gay men no longer allowed to donate organs

"Dr. Peter Nickerson, director of Transplant Manitoba, which procures organs in that province, said transplant programs must now by law interview family members of the donor as part of the screening process.

"We'll be asking about things like travel, history of infectious disease, whether they've [donors] been in jail — that puts you at increased risk," Nickerson said. "Have they been an IV drug abuser in the past? Have they had tattoos? There's a whole list of questions we go through."

They are also asked about the donor's sexual orientation. The donor will be excluded if the donor is a man who had sex with another man in the previous five years.

Health Canada had contracted the Canadian Standards Association in 2003 to come up with standardized guidelines to ensure the safety of the organ donation system."

I understand Health Canada's desire to protect patients from diseases that can be transmitted through organs, but this is a little over-zealous. Not only are they ruling out an entire group of people, they are ruling out a lot of others based on some stereotypical notions about risky behavior. There is more relevant information to determine that a donor is at risk for disease. Sexual orientation is not necessarily an indicator that the donor is at risk, engaging in risky behaviour is an indication that a donor would be at risk.