AT&T and Hasbro pull YouTube ads over abuse claims
AT&T and Hasbro have become the latest firms to pull adverts from YouTube over claims paedophiles are leaving offensive comments next to videos of children on the platform.
The telecoms firm and toymaker follow food giant Nestle, which on Wednesday said it had also "paused" its ads.
YouTube said it had disabled comments on millions of videos that "could be subject to predatory comments".
AT&T is America's and one of the world's largest telecom's firms. It owns the Warner Brothers Hollywood studio which makes cartoons like Bugs Bunny and runs the Cartoon Network. It clearly wants to portray itself as a family friendly organisation.
The question of content on social media platforms has been bubbling for ages, but there now seems to be mulitple issues from self harm content to terrorist activity, but all these advertisers knew these platforms were open platforms when they put their ads on them, yet still chose to place ads on these sites.
I see this going either of two ways, either pictures and videos of children dancing around in their underwear gets classified as child pornography, or society has to think very carefully about how and even whether children should use the internet, especially social media sites.
But where is the line drawn over protection of children in regards to the internet? Is it the platform's responsibility to ensure that all content is deemed suitable and besides, who gets to decide what is suitable and what is not, as per my example earlier?
What about parents? Shouldn't parents be made to be responsible for their children's internet use? It doesn't help that in many instances, parents upload pictures of their children onto the internet, whether it be holiday snaps or messing around in their homes.
The only reason paedophiles are leaving lewd comments on children's videos on youtube, is because the videos are there to begin with.
Many commentators say that you can't turn back time and children need to be tech savy, which I agree with, but the flip side is parents would not invite a paedophile into their house, yet in many cases allow their children to do whatever they want on the net, quite often with the parent's active encouragement.
Children are not able to judge what is safe and what is not and even teenagers cannot fully understand the dangers that the internet may pose to them and besides it's not kids who are paying for the devices to access the internet or paying for the broadband providers, but their parents. Personally, I think parents need to clamp down on their children's internet use.
Should we rethink whether there needs to be a carpet ban on all pictures and videos of children on the internet and really start to rethink whether children should be using the internet at all?
The internet is not and never was the Cartoon Network.