I like the youtube channel Mousetrap Monday. The host shows various types of mouse, rat, gopher, and mole traps in action, and discusses their efficacy. His videos used to show the rodent getting snapped or drowned, but now he avoids showing this because he says youtube might shut him down.
However, I can go to all kinds of other youtube varmint hunting channels, like Squirrel Hunter or Severn Valley Ratters, and vermin extermination is shown in all its gruesomeness. What gives? Is it because these last two channels originate in England and they have different rules?
I don’t believe so. I know of YouTubers that have wound up in trouble for harming animals. I fully understand being risk averse in that area, and would actually suspect that those other channels will eventually get reported by enough people and get in trouble.
It also wouldn’t surprise me if that had already happened to the guy on your first channel, or it happened to someone they follow. That’s the sort of thing that would get them in trouble.
There is one possibility—that the other channels have an MCN (multi channel network) that has more power due to having more channels, and they are willing to go to bat for them. That does work with copyright issues sometimes, so I could see it working here.
But, no, I do not believe there are any different rules for different countries in this respect.
It’s possible his channel could get demonetized for being advertiser-unfriendly even if it’s not actually shut down. If he relies on Google ads for income that would obviously be a problem if he’s trying to make a living off it. Perhaps the other channels either don’t care (it’s just a hobby) or they have other sources of income like sponsor reads or Patreon.
Tangentially, channels that do reviews of movies or TV shows have a very precarious line to walk because of the nebulous definition of fair use in copyright. Channels that use actual video clips are perfectly within their right to do so, but that still doesn’t prevent them from getting copyright strikes. Appealing those strikes requires time and potentially opening the creator up to litigation, losing any ad income in the meantime. So in a lot of cases it’s simply easier to tread lightly than try to fight it.
When you upload a monetized video, you have to declare whether it contains certain types of content in the following categories:
Inappropriate language
Adult content
Violence
Shocking content
Harmful or dangerous acts
Drug-related content
Hateful content
Firearms-related content
Sensitive issues
‘Shocking content’ is described as:
Situations that may upset, disgust or shock viewers
Light or moderately shocking content like body waste or liquids that’s censored or shown in context for educational, documentary or other purposes
Shocking content, like graphic images of human or animal body parts, that’s uncensored or intended to shock viewers
Highly shocking content, like extreme accidents or injuries, that are clearly visible or audible, or where the whole purpose of the video is to shock viewers
Classifying a video as containing these content types does not necessarily mean it will be demonetized, but it increases the likelihood of that, and at the very least, reduces the number of advertisers that will be matched with it, and probably limits the amount that YouTube will promote the video in recommendations etc.