YouTube monetization policy

 

Aside from the historical argument of access to and usage of historical videos, whose data is collected and authenticated, there are also dozens of claims of historical monetization. This are those users’ accounts that upload videos. For commercial purposes they record advertisement at a certain price. However, this explains that income levels are not the same in each country, with countries like the US and UK having in some countries of high people per capita incomes being more developed and so have more companies that have an opportunity to get involved in the process of monetization. The French introduction to the topic of historical monetization on Youtube in 1994 mentioned that:

“France’s Institute for Noir Films (FIAC) has a 10-year budget of 175 million FR, or around 3% of the whole budget. The main of this budget is 19 million FR, and it goes to national and international non-political performances. That’s more than 25% of the budget of the largest non-political production in France”.

Four networks in France that are involved in historic monetization according to their rating websites that gives clients three types of views: commercial, commercial and not commercial. The following graph gives a comparison of these programs.

The following (scalable) graph shows the Youtube statistics regarding the historic monetization for the last few years. There are 653 (611) content pieces (immense) in this list and 54 of them are particularly memorable. In total, around 12.7 million people watch this content on YouTube.

This source shows the most relevant historical monetization metadata. The name of the character in the starting row is of French origin (see the difference with the previous diagram). The natural detail that helps to understand the historical monetization is the fact that 38 of these content pieces are uploaded in France but because the majority of the occasions are French users watched this video from other countries, and the majority of the digits are not affected by taxation (due to the French label) the data would be somewhat biased from the rating per video that an SEO searcher would sometimes consider as flattering for users.