This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Internet culture Start‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Internet culture To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles Expand : Pick an article from here or here Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images Stubs : All stubs are located here Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}} See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention Media Start‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Media To-do List: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Mackay Radio Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite NPOV : Content (media and publishing) Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper Other : Answer requests for comments Technology Start‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Internet Start‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Google Start‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Google, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Google and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GoogleWikipedia:WikiProject GoogleTemplate:WikiProject GoogleGoogle articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Google To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Articles for most of the other products listed here and here. Assess : All articles in the Category:Unknown-importance Google articles and Category:Unassessed Google articles using the project's assessment scale Expand : Google Mapathon, Google Talkback Maintain : This WikiProject Merge : Google mobile services into List of Google products Stubs : Category:Stub-Class Google articles and Category:Google stubs Update : List of features in Android and Gmail interface#Product integration. Update logos of Google Marketing Platform products Other : Add more stuff to this to do list if you like! (click here...) create: Help the Google article for a good article status Improve the Outline of Google Get more members using : {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Google/Invite Members}} Infobox Images with transparent areas needing a different background color

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 180 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present.

I've seen a lot of criticism of Vevo by different sources, on issues such as it pushing home user videos out of the spotlight (I saw a TON of this when "Bad Romance" hit more total views than "Charlie Bit My Finger") and its publishing of only censored versions of videos. It seems to have a lot of critics of its recent influence on YouTube. Many of the highest rated user comments on several videos are statements like "FUCK VEVO" as well. I've heard people claim that Vevo is likely inflating the view counts on its videos in one way or another too. I feel like someone should maybe compile a section covering this type of information.Josh (talk) 01:50, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Separate criticism sections are not usually good writing style, as they can become magnets for soapboxing and WP:COATRACK edits. Vevo has picked up a fair amount of criticism from regular YouTube users, but criticism needs to be reliably sourced rather than unsourced personal opinion. The charts on Vevo are a puzzle, because it seems odd that some of the videos on Vevo have managed to achieve more views in a few months than Charlie Bit My Finger or Evolution of Dance did in several years. However, it is hard to comment on the ratings system without proper sourcing. Vevo has also been criticized for showing censored versions of videos, but even in the days of YouTube, Avril Lavigne was blanked in Girlfriend when she sang "I'm the mother****ing princess". Some pop videos have NSFW content, and they tend to be toned down for Vevo. There are a lot of comments on Vevo videos criticizing the service, but they are not a reliable source that could be used in the article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:13, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

<http://blogs.hbr.org/haque/2009/12/how_vevo_makes_google_more_lik.html> Critique of Vevo appearing in the Harvard Business Review. 06:46, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

i agree there should be a criticism section added because vevo has received a lot criticism from youtube users.

I second that, Vevo is the target of a lot of criticism from the Youtube community, this should be mentioned. Some reasons include removal of other user's videos, often lyrics videos, on copyright ground, the message of the video not being available in "your country," and the ads. The lack of national availability is the source of a lot of hate towards Vevo, I know I was personally irked that the video for Piano Man, by Billy Joel, is not available to me for this reason despite residency in the US. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trent1994 (talk • contribs) 02:01, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree. Not talking about the heavy criticism (found on all of their videos on YouTube) means ignoring an important fact.--Athaba (talk) 21:41, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree as well. I see an incredible number of "*$#%@ VEVO" comments on YT - and came here wondering why everyone seems to hate it. They do censor some content apparently - but so do lots of other media sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.9.143.128 (talk) 16:25, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to add a criticism section twice but the User: ianmacm keeps removing them because he for claims they are "Unsourced" like ian mate if you don't believe vevo is criticized by youtube users check out the vevo videos on youtube there are always many criticizing comments on them everyday — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trent1994 (talk • contribs) 03:02, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The issue here is WP:SPS. I'm not disputing that there are numerous critical comments about Vevo posted on the videos, but since people can say whatever they like on message boards, they are not considered to be a reliable source. This is an ongoing problem, because it would be useful to have some criticism of Vevo in the article, but an anonymous message board posting would not be suitable.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 04:20, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, perhaps someone could make a request to VEVO that they "respond to criticism of their service"? If only for the SOLE purpose of generating a "reliable reference" (a statement from the company would I suppose technically be a press release, but I don't know what else WOULD be a reliable source.. That says something like, "people have criticized the VEVO service for its alleged censorship of some small bits (like individual single words) content, alleged questions as to whether we can count, as well as <whatever else people seem to hate about it.." I don't know what that is - that's why I typed "Vevo wikipedia" into Google in the first place.. 216.9.142.231 (talk) 21:12, 3 December 2011 (UTC)Jim[reply]

I myself have many criticism for vevo and have to object to the censorship you yourself are creating here Ian... I have to ask you if you can offer proof of these complaints being solely based on 'message boards'

you sir are making post without reliable sourcing... Also sir no where in your articles or responses have you listed a link to define reliable sources...

Please provide those sources otherwise you are doing exactly what you are claiming others here are doing....... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.134.144.232 (talk) 23:19, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's not how it works: The burden of proof is on you.--Matija (talk) 20:10, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The burden of proof is also on Ian to prove everything else that is written about Vevo on here. Herm... I don't seem to see too many citations for any of this stuff... Oh... is Vevo's website a reliable source? Is Vevo's website more reliable than a personal blog? Just as biased! It is a fact that on nearly every Vevo video the highest rated comment is "Vevo Sucks." I have a feeling that if I was to do a study and select 100 random Vevo videos and determine the number of them that has a Vevo sucks comment on them - and then published my study in a respected academic journal - Ian would still end up deleting the addition to this page! Ian probably works for Vevo. He has been hired to defend them on the internet. But, stopping people from including a criticism section on wikipedia is like putting your finger in a dam. It's a losing battle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.166.37 (talk) 22:13, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ian does not work for Vevo. Wikipedia articles should avoid separate "Criticism/Controversy" sections because they are WP:COATRACKs. Saying "Vevo sucks" is easy, but what the article needs is some reliably sourced criticism. The media has said very little about Vevo as a whole, this is an ongoing problem for the article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 02:07, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's because "the media" does not see things the same way we (the users) do. Professional media sources all all pro-VEVO because they don't understand the whole idea of the criticism. It's a whole conflict-of-interest to rely on these people for information when it comes to the opinions of the users themselves. --67.180.161.183(talk)_{06:57, 24 November 2011 (UTC)}[reply]

Some of you need to realize that most people on Youtube are saying "Fuck VEVO" because they hate Justin Bieber ads. That's purely personal opinion.

I think that having absolutely no criticism section by citing WP:COATRACK preemptively is an incorrect use of the spirit of this rule and is hindering the WP:NPOV perspective of this article. If the criticism has been reported by a reliable source or by at least a large number of less-than reliable sources, then it should be mentioned here with the appropriate precautions and responses (if citations exist). Let the editors work on the article freely and then discuss how the content should be edited to maintain Wikipedia standards. We must assume good faith WP:AGF. Hamsterlopithecus (talk) 19:10, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This issue has caused some confusion in the past. YouTube was created in 2005 as a platform for home videos. It soon became clear that members of the public were uploading pop videos, even though they did not own the copyright and were not supposed to do this. The big record companies never liked YouTube, and wanted a separate platform along the lines of MTV. The versions of videos on Vevo are intended to be broadly in line with MTV policies, although they are not bound by FCC guidelines such as the classic Seven dirty words, which were supposed to be "banned".

The claim that there are no swear words in Vevo videos is incorrect; check out Big Sean - Dance (A$$) Remix ft. Nicki Minaj (NSFW). Big Sean and Nicki Minaj may qualify for a bar of soap in the mouth each after this performance.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 09:09, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Although the information in the table is correct as of today, it will require constant updates. Past attempts at adding viewing figure charts to YouTube have been reverted for this reason. If the table goes out of date quickly, it would be better not to have it at all.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:25, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they should be in the VevoCertified list as they have no relationship with Vevo. That would make the list as follows:

1. Baby - Justin Bieber featuring Ludacris

2. On the Floor - Jennifer Lopez featuring Pitbull

3. Love the Way You Lie - Eminem featuring Rihanna

4. Party Rock Anthem - LMFAO featuring Lauren Bennett and GoonRock

5. Waka Waka (This Time For Africa) - Shakira featuring Freshlyground

6. Bad Romance - Lady Gaga

7. Danza Kuduro - Don Omar featuring Lucenzo

8. Not Afraid - Eminem

9. Rain Over Me - Pitbull featuring Marc Anthony

10. Rolling in the Deep - Adele --187.7.103.16 (talk) 03:23, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation

Check this: Gangnam Style on VEVO.com It is on the official VEVO site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UPS Salla (talk • contribs) 19:08, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For hopefully the last time, this is not hosted on Vevo. It is on the officialpsy channel on YouTube. It does not feature the word Vevo anywhere in the branding (screenshot). Compare this to Justin Bieber - Baby ft. Ludacris (screenshot). End of.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:19, 18 December 2012 (UTC) [reply]

An encyclopedia should also say the pros and cons of certain things and this is most definitely a con and a big one at that. Wikipedia does this in other articles, how the hell is this any different?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.36.151 (talk) 21:52, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]