Hi Casey,

What about the volunteers who have been supplying good-quality community captions to creators? We have collectively put in thousands of hours captioning videos and there is little to no recognition of that in this post. Captioning in general is a neglected feature on YouTube and this change just makes YouTube even less accessible than it already was.

After this change comes into effect, how can a volunteer contribute captions to a creator's video (other than creating them on a different site and sending them to the creator for upload)? In this week's Creator Insider video, it was mentioned that an "Editor without Revenue" permission was being created and that it would eventually be extended to captioning. Is there a timescale for that feature coming into effect (and will it be before September 28th)?

While the free Amara sub will help creators out in the short term, it will divorce creators from their existing volunteer captioners which will make it harder to reconnect after the six-month free Amara sub has ended.

Over the entire lifespan of the captioning feature, YouTube have done absolutely nothing to build any kind of community around captioning and have ignored feedback from deaf creators (especially Rikki Poynter), deaf viewers, and other captions users. This is a backwards step for YouTube, an insult to all of the volunteer captioners who care about quality, and a significant blow to accessibility for anyone who relies on captions

Thanks for the reply. I have to add: I wonder the degree to which YouTube's lack of notifications when community-submitted captions came in crippled this feature from ever becoming more popular. The only way I found out about submissions was when I manually checked the page, or (more often) when users would contact me directly and ask me to approve their submissions. The fact that creators couldn't be notified when submissions came in was strange and must have negatively impacted adoption of the feature.

I don't understand the rationale here. You guys already disabled community approval for captions (despite continuing to claim otherwise outside of one Twitter reply confirming it a year ago), so what is the issue with "abuse" here if captions already needed to be approved by the video uploader anyway? All this does is add a further layer of complication between a captionist and the creator.

> These contributions are reviewed and published by creators, or automatically published after receiving enough community reviews. 

Thank you for destroying the entire english virtual youtuber community with this move. This will be a deathblow to many virtual youtubers who have large western audiences that rely on this feature, and will result in these fans forced to reupload with hardsubs they make themselves(these people often completely lack the ability to speak English and are one man shows), or add needless additional costs of inhouse subtitles. This solves no problems and adds needless worry to many channels. 

You'll force out abortions like Stadia and execute features people actually use and rely upon. Positively reprehensible.

Could you expand on that <0.2% number a bit? 0.2% is a significant amount of time at youtube's scale. If people watch one billion hours of video a day[1], then that's two million hours of community contributions watched a day which seems like a lot.

Good. Thanks for your. Asking

Why YouTube Why You Could Be Ashamed Of Your Self