Self-harm, abortion, and domestic violence can now have full ads if they are "non-gory" — What changes with YouTube's new standards?

Self-harm, abortion, and domestic violence can now have full ads if they are "non-gory" — What changes with YouTube's new standards?

2026年01月18日 11:10

The "atmosphere" surrounding YouTube monetization has shifted slightly once again.


In January 2026, YouTube updated its "advertiser-friendly" guidelines to accommodate advertisers, expanding the scope for full ad revenue on certain sensitive topics that were previously prone to ad restrictions (commonly referred to as the "yellow $").


The key point this time is not the topic itself but the "presentation (context)." YouTube's direction is clear: if the content is presented in a non-gory (avoiding overly graphic depictions or detailed explanations) manner and within contexts such as dramatization (recreation or fiction), discussion or commentary, personal experiences, prevention or awareness, or news or journalism, then even sensitive topics can be more aligned with being "ad-friendly" (References 1, 2, 3).


What has been "relaxed": The focus is on the "intensity of depiction"

According to TechCrunch, YouTube explained that in the past, even dramatized content was often subject to ad restrictions because the **specificity of depiction (how vividly it was described)** was not sufficiently considered. As a result, affected videos were marked with the yellow $, making full monetization difficult (Reference 1).


In other words, until now, there were cases where sensitive themes were "mechanically" restricted, and this update aims to address that issue.


The summary of updates from YouTube's official help also points in the same direction.Content focusing on "controversial issues" can now be eligible for ad revenue if presented in a non-gory and dramatized context, revising the previous tendency to restrict content regardless of whether it was gory or fictional (Reference 2).


Topics likely to be affected / Areas still under strict scrutiny

The following topics have been primarily highlighted in reports as the "targets" of this update.

  • Self-harm

  • Suicide

  • Domestic abuse

  • Adult sexual abuse

  • Abortion

  • Sexual harassment
    ※All require a "non-gory" presentation and context such as dramatization, discussion, or commentary (References 1, 3).


On the other hand, YouTube continues to exclude topics like child abuse (including child sexual exploitation and trafficking) and eating disorders from full monetization (References 1, 2, 3).


This decision reflects a deliberate choice to leave certain areas where attaching ads could conflict with the protection of individuals involved or pose social risks.


Why this change now?: Balancing creator dissatisfaction and advertiser realities

YouTube repeatedly cites "feedback from creators" as the reason. When serious commentary, personal narratives, or dramatized works face unpredictable revenue due to the "yellow $," it becomes challenging to produce videos that require significant investment in research, composition, and supervision (References 1, 3).


AP reports that a YouTube monetization policy manager stated, "We want to ensure revenue opportunities for creators telling sensitive stories or dramatizing them, while respecting advertiser preferences" (Reference 3).


The logic from the advertisers' side is not straightforward either. Companies fear most that "their brand appears next to shocking or sensational footage." Conversely, if the content is non-gory, contextually appropriate, and contributes to awareness or understanding, there might be room to consider advertising. YouTube likely wants to incorporate this "contextual difference" more strongly into its review logic (References 1, 2, 3).


Social media reactions: Welcome and skepticism, and "unalive" fatigue

Reactions on social media were a mix of applause and sighs.


On Reddit's r/technology, comments like "Finally, we don't have to hear 'unalive' or 'self delete' anymore" reflect fatigue with euphemisms (Reference 4). Meanwhile, there is also a strong air of skepticism with comments like "Why is YouTube suddenly doing something good?" and "It's ultimately for profit, isn't it?" (Reference 4).


Years of "sudden changes in judgment" and "lack of transparency" have eroded trust in the platform.


Another Reddit post mentioned a recent video where even the word "abuse" was censored or beeped, with reactions suggesting that such extreme word censorship is abnormal (Reference 5).


Thus, this update is not merely about revenue but also ties into the broader discussion of **"whether necessary words can be spoken in necessary situations,"** relating to the health of expression.


Of course, it's not all optimism.


There is persistent skepticism, such as "Even if the guidelines change, it doesn't guarantee stable judgments" and "Creators might continue self-censorship." Monetization judgments are often a black box, and it's hard to see "what went wrong" in individual videos. If the operation doesn't catch up with the changes in wording, on-the-ground actions won't change immediately.


Creator practices: The keys to monetization are "editing" and "meta information"

With this change, there are three major points that creators of sensitive content should be aware of.

  1. Designing for "non-gory"
    Not only visuals but also the "detail of explanations" in narration and subtitles can influence judgments. Editing that retains necessary information while avoiding graphic depictions for shock purposes becomes important (References 1, 2, 3).

  2. Consistency in titles, thumbnails, and descriptions
    Even if the content is educational, if the outer presentation is provocative, it can be suspected of "sensationalism." The more sensitive the area, the more aligning meta information honestly leans towards safety.

  3. Context presentation
    Clearly stating "the purpose of this video" at the beginning, such as personal narratives, prevention or support, commentary, or reporting, makes it easier to convey to both viewers and reviewers (Reference 3).


Conclusion: The shift in boundaries is about "context," not "topics"

YouTube has moved away from the crude dichotomy of "sensitive = no ads," broadening the door to full monetization based on **"whether it is non-gory / within a dramatization or commentary context"** (References 1, 2, 3).


While social media welcomes this, it also reveals a simultaneous eruption of distrust due to years of opacity (References 4, 5).


Whether the yellow $ truly decreases depends more on the stability of operations and the sincerity of creators than on the wording of guidelines. Will we move closer to a world not driven by euphemisms, or will "another form of self-censorship" remain? This update has once again highlighted the complex coexistence of expression and advertising, starting with YouTube monetization.


Reference URLs


Reference Article

YouTube Relaxes Monetization Guidelines for Some Controversial Topics
Source: https://techcrunch.com/2026/01/16/youtube-relaxes-monetization-guidelines-for-some-controversial-topics/

← Back to Article List