So, who really benefits from YouTube’s implementation of Google+ accounts as a means of identifying individual comments and reducing the amount of comment SPAM and trolling. Is YouTube doing it for the good of the YouTube community, YouTube’s revenue, Google+ account growth or something else altogether?
All of the above, of course!
Let’s start with the “Good of the Community.” Study after study shows that anonymity gives people not only the power of free speech, which is good, but it also fosters a more negative effect – known as the “online disinhibition effect.” It’s very real problem for today’s sites that rely on social engagement as part of their core experience. State governments have become involved with all 50 states passing laws against online bullying, stalking and harassment. Yet, it’s so prevalent that many providers offer comment solutions for website owners including Facebook, which released its own comment plugin back in 2011 that requires your Facebook account be used as a way to remove anonymity and promote better behavior. Other provider solutions include Disqus, Livefyre and IntenseDebate. The bottom line is that negativity online can be extremely intense, and it can inhibit participation from the larger community.
That larger community viewer is the prize. It’s no secret that TV viewing habits are shifting. Google is paying content producers to aggregate more original content to their platform. It pays individual producers by showing ads in conjunction with their video, but Google has also created studios across the country allowing more popular content producers the ability to gain access to higher end production space and has introduced paid subscriptions to channels as well. It’s not hard to envision YouTube as a post analog TV provider since it is already included in so many devices (AppleTV, Boxee, Roku, Samsung Smart TVs, Smart DVD Players, etc.). By reducing the amount of negativity, YouTube increases its appeal to a larger user base, thus, capturing more eyeballs.
Another factor to consider is the dark side of comment falsification. It’s well known that some brands have gamed reviews and comments about their own products or services to make them appear better than spontaneous reviews would indicate. However, the flip side is that some brands have also used that same veil of anonymity to negatively comment on their competitors’ products in an attempt to disparage them and further game the system. Removing anonymity helps reduce bad behavior on the part of brands as well as consumers.
Finally, is YouTube trying to grow its Google+ user base? Of course, it is. Social logins and their link to consumer identity is huge for business. Facebook, Google and other social networks make money via advertising. The more they provide advertisers with information about their contacts – their interests and hobbies, the sites they visit, their relationship status, the videos they watch, etc. – the more revenue they can generate. Requiring logins to comment helps Google keep people logged into its platform and lets it collect information about what videos people are watching; providing information to better target ads and pre-roll – and increasing its own value.