I would normally love to dump on Youtube but not in this case in my opinion. YT are in no way obligated to provide emergency services and nowhere do they agree to this expectation. In my opinion someones life should not depend on the internet availability. Rather people should ensure they have a reliable phone to call emergency services. A dispatcher may be able to talk the person through some rudimentary CPR steps.<p>I would encourage everyone to get CPR certified as it can save lives in your home, with your friends and at work. Especially those with children should get and remain CPR certified. Also consider buying an AED [1] for your home and encourage your workplace to install AED's on each floor and get at least 10% of the staff CPR certified. AED's are super easy to use and most models will literally talk you through how to use them. There are usually discounts for training larger numbers of people and the trainers will come on-site with everything they need. The safety management teams should also find out if having {n} percent of people CPR certified will lower their corporate insurance.<p>Some CPR training companies can also do advanced CPR training including one or two days of on-site advanced didactic training. The knowledge provided by these courses can save lives especially when emergency services are delayed or otherwise busy with others and this knowledge can be used anywhere.<p>[1] - <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_external_defibrillator" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automated_external_defibrillat...</a>
Youtube will say "Oh, we can't pick and choose because then unscrupulous channels will tag their garbage videos as CPR and not get ads, or the search quality will go down."<p>This is utter BS, because we know they have the tools to boost or suppress individual channels, so YT needs to vet existing channels, and flag them as ad free or important for search. A channel and video that comes to mind is the Red Cross' CPR instructional video: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eRwgM2Pa4o">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eRwgM2Pa4o</a>
Even if there were no ads you're going to get four and half minutes of radio-dj style commentary at the top of the video to increase the length -- to optimize for The Algorithm.
What if someone who needs CPR googles for a CPR tutorial, and gets a <i>bad</i> one?<p>What if it's not wrong exactly, it's just really bad instruction, it's confusing and takes too long. Maybe it's accidentally confusing or misleading. Maybe it's _old_ and best practices for CPR have changed in some way since it was created.<p>Is YouTube liable for allowing such a thing? I mean, legally we know that _currently_ there are probably a variety of reasons they aren't, and it's anyway a different question _legally_ than of putting ads before a (presumably high-quality?) CPR instructional video.<p>But ethically? I think this example shows... it's kind of crazy to hold YouTube responsible for making sure someone succesfully gets access to an instructional video on CPR in the moment of actually needing CPR, _and_ that eliminating ads before CPR instructional videos would actually just be _part_ of that if we did consider them responsible. They'd also have to make sure that someone searching actually found a correct and high-quality best practices instructional video, right? Which also seems unreasonable. I think it's unreasonable to expect that YouTube should provide emergency material in the urgent moment of need, that's not what YouTube does.
People need to watch more Doctor Mike! Chest compressions, chest compressions, chest compressions! Although I don't think he translates his content to Dutch...<p>Seriously though, call emergency services and they will walk you through CPR while sending help. YouTube is not an emergency service.
"Dutch man needs CPR, but YouTube shows ads before tutorial", says newspaper whose website needs more than one click to disallow tracking cookies.
it's completely unreasonable to complain that a site which doesn't promise emergency first aid instruction doesn't do a good job at providing emergency first aid instruction.<p>pornhub also didn't help me learn how to perform CPR. should we be outraged about that too?
When you Google for emergency CPR tutorials it is not giving you videos designed by their creators as instructions for learning some CPR <i>during</i> an emergency. It is giving videos designed for learning CPR so you will be ready for <i>future</i> emergencies.<p>Many of these will be unsuited for emergency use. For example the Red Cross CPR video someone else linked to takes almost two minutes to actually get to <i>doing</i> CPR. That's longer than the sum of the lengths of the video in the article and the ads.<p>It might be a good idea to have some videos specifically aimed at people who need to learn right away to deal with a present emergency (for a variety of things, not just CPR).<p>Searches for "emergency" or similar should <i>not</i> include those videos in the general results but instead should have a notice at the top of the results saying "If you are dealing with an emergency right now click here" which would take you to a page where you can click on what kind of emergency you are dealing with and it gives a curated list of videos, along with text instructions.
Well sadly even if someone who already knows CPR is available, it's not that effective.<p>Definitely still worth attempting, but my point is that complaining about the ads on youtube for this use case is silly.
I am reminded of this Loading Artist comic: <a href="https://loadingartist.com/comic/dire-situation/" rel="nofollow">https://loadingartist.com/comic/dire-situation/</a>
To this day, when there is "breaking news" I find a television, or at least a stream from a TV network. There's a time and place for everything. Youtube in a life/death situation is not that.
I believe YouTube would need to hand select such videos. According to Tubefilter 500 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every minute. (2019 data) It's hard for me to see how YouTube can be held responsible for _anything_ that is posted. Not that some effort shouldn't be made, but the scope of the task is enormous.
Cannot believe people won't pay $10/month to be ready to save other people's lives. Fortunately, I care enough that I do that. But I cannot expect others to be as moral, intelligent, and handsome as I am.<p>To anyone reading this: do not fear, I believe your life is worth more than $10/month even if others do not.
For folks who use TikTok, "TheSleepyParamedic" has a fantastic CPR demonstration that's worth bookmarking.<p><a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@thesleepyparamedic/video/7184506959775698219" rel="nofollow">https://www.tiktok.com/@thesleepyparamedic/video/71845069597...</a>
So where would this end? Should all types of content that instruct how to act in any type of emergency be add free? And should the content creators be allowed first make some CPR or like intro and then other content? And have full thing be add free?
I still consider this not even half as bad as shoving ear-popping funky music ads down your earholes smack in the middle of some quiet reflective classical music.
Next: If youtube is pressed for a statement on this what are the chances that it says something like "We serve adverts to give people the best experience with Youtube" or similar ?
There should be an option for special case emergency videos. One's that don't play with ads and show up as top results.<p>The video would have to be reviewed before receiving said ranking.<p>I couldn't imagine a lot of uploaders would abuse this as they wouldn't get paid.<p>Of course the question is, what's in it for Google? You've probably noticed when you search a disease, it provides a nice result with graphics and dialogs. Although I don't know if they'd be interesting in preserving that image over to Youtube, as that place is a cesspool for content creation, whatever that means...