Irish TV tax break gets green light from Europe
RTÉ could be a major beneficiary of the €211m scheme, with The Late Late Show among the programmes that should qualify.
The commission examined the plan, announced by minister Jack Chambers in last year's Budget, under EU state-aid rules. The aim is to promote the production of unscripted audiovisual programmes with either Irish or European cultural content.
The measure will be introduced for a four-year period, backdated to last December and running until December 31, 2028.
The aid is in the form of a tax credit of up to 20pc of the production expenditure that happens in Ireland. The maximum support cannot cover more than 16pc of the total cost of production.
To be eligible, a programme must have a minimum cost of €250,000, with half of that being spent in Ireland. A 'cultural test', which will be designed by the Government, will be used to ensure that the unscripted productions 'contribute meaningfully to the promotion and expression of Irish or European culture'.
Anthony Muldoon, director of strategic policy at Screen Producers Ireland (SPI), said the tax incentive is a 'transformative' investment for Ireland's creative industry. 'It will empower our producers and creators to develop and produce high-quality programmes that resonate with both domestic and international audiences,' he said.
Members of SPI had joined together to campaign for the tax credit, forming an Unscripted Working Group, and had co-operated with the Department of Finance and Revenue, as well as with the Department of Arts and Media.
Stuart Switzer, chair of the Unscripted Working Group, said he was thrilled that the European Commission had decided to approve the aid package. 'This is a first in Europe, and a recognition that the creative unscripted sector in Ireland has the potential to emulate the success of our scripted colleagues,' he said.
'The challenge will be to ensure the benefits of the incentive are retained within the independent production sector to build companies of scale.'
According to an analysis included in the Tax Strategy Group papers last year, spending on unscripted TV productions could increase from about €90m a year to €300m if a tax credit was introduced. It referred to two similar schemes in Europe, operated by Malta and Cyprus.
"If introduced, such a relief could have the potential to support additional employment in the sector and increase demand for studio space,' the report said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Letters to the Editor, June 21st: On public service, the cost of living and sunscreen
Sir, – A stream of commentary in the columns of The Irish Times has crystalised a sobering truth, that ' Our administrative and legal procedures simply cannot unblock the logjam in time to prevent serious damage ', as Michael McDowell put it. ('There is a way to break the logjam in infrastructure', June 18th). Before last Christmas, Patrick Honohan, former governor of the Central Bank, wrote in an Irish Times article: 'The issue is not so much what the aims of public policy should be... the problem has been in delivery'; and recently an Irish Times editorial spoke of our 'sluggish' administrative processes. A simple example illustrates the depth of this dysfunction: a friend of mine, an experienced property expert who spent much of his career in the public sector, repeatedly attempted to draw attention to suboptimal performance in a prominent State body (mirroring wider poor performance manifest in the ballooning housing crisis) and to offer solutions. As a last resort, he wrote to Taoiseach Micheál Martin in January and, after several reminders in the meantime, he finally received a reply this week, six months on, saying that his letter had been forwarded to Jack Chambers, Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitisation. The Office of the Taoiseach publishes a national risk assessment annually which sets out the '24 strategic risks facing the country in the short, medium and long term'. READ MORE Pandemics, war, housing and social cohesion are mentioned, for example, but never mentioned in this annual assessment is the overarching risk, which if not addressed, compounds all other risks, namely, administrative incompetence and inertia. The Civil Service is not up to the job. Just for example, with 15 grades and associated sign-off authorities above the level of Executive Officer, and several more below EO, Civil Service structures are not fit for purpose in this day of digitisation and AI; reasonable public expectations of personal accountability, with consequences, are thwarted when things go wrong, be it in the national children's hospital, nursing homes, the Office of Public Works, policing or the degradation by nitrates of Our Lady's Island lagoon. To achieve progress on his extensive portfolio of responsibilities, radical public service reform has to be front and centre for Mr Chambers. – Yours, etc, EDDIE MOLLOY, Rathgar, Dublin 6. Rent pressure zones Sir, – While most attention has focused on the likely impact of changes to rent pressure zones (RPZs) on future rents, little consideration seems to have been given to their consequences for house prices. Firstly, housing and apartment development land prices will rise on the basis that building rental homes will be perceived as having become more profitable and this will lead to increased house prices, even if other building costs don't also increase. Secondly, as long-term rental yield expectations will have been increased, they will lift the capital value of underlying assets and progressively influence the market for not-for-rent new and second-hand homes. As always, it is not just rental income that's important in property investment but the 'total return' which includes capital appreciation determined by purchase-sale market conditions and timing. Thanks to the RPZ changes, these have suddenly become more favourable for landlords and builders and less so for buyers and renters. – Yours, etc, BRIAN FLANAGAN, Blackrock, Co Dublin. The high cost of living in Ireland Sir, – Your front page article ( 'Ireland second most expensive country in Europe ' June 20th), will come as no surprise to anyone holidaying or on business in mainland Europe this year. We have just returned from Cyprus where a bottle of decent supermarket wine was €5.50 (€10 here), 20 cigarettes were €4.30 (€14.50 here) and a litre of unleaded diesel was €1.32 (€1.74 here in rural Donegal). Against an average monthly rent of ¤2,000 in Ireland, €850 a month could get you a furnished two-bed apartment in Paphos with access to a pool and a five-minute drive from the beach and all shopping amenities. Of course, wages are lower (minimum wage of €6.60 an hour there, €13.50 here) but that's irrelevant if you are working from home for a multinational – your salary is the same wherever you are, or like us, you are on a fixed pension income. Around 76 per cent of Greek Cypriots speak English, all government documents are in both languages, they drive on the left and you can keep in touch with news in English from British Forces radio or the English edition of the Cyprus Mail. Annual sunshine hours are 3,000 against 1,500 in Dublin. After 11 years in Ireland we've had enough and are planning a move. If it wasn't for the cat, we'd be there now. – Yours, etc, KENNETH HARPER, Burtonport, Co Donegal. Sir, – Eurostat's finding that Ireland is the second most expensive country in Europe came as no surprise. Donegal friends of ours recently returned from Venice, and when I asked if it had been expensive, they replied: 'Not really – after living in Ireland, Venice seemed quite reasonable.' When Venice starts to feel like a bargain, something has gone badly wrong. – Yours, etc, ENDA CULLEN, Armagh. Sir, – Your recent reporting on Ireland being the second most expensive country in the EU is a timely reminder of the factors driving up costs for households and businesses. Among these, fuel stands out: not because of global market volatility, but because of Irish taxes. We believe Minister for Finance Paschal Donohoe should establish an expert group to review how fuel for transport and home heating is taxed. Its remit should be clear: It should secure fair revenue for the State, support the shift to renewable energy and protect vulnerable consumers from punishing costs. Current policy hits hardest those with no alternative. That's not sustainable – environmentally, economically, or politically. – Yours, etc, KEVIN McPARTLAN, Chief executive, Fuels for Ireland, Dublin 1. Sir, – Your article (' Ireland's grocery prices are still soaring. How can that be? 'June 16th) cites many reasons for the huge grocery price hikes which we've all seen in the past year or so. Aside from geopolitical events, there is one development that I have noticed in all our local supermarkets over the past year: there has been a huge change in the way supermarket food in particular has been displayed. Now acres of plastic doors have been installed for refrigerated and frozen goods. Inside these cabinets every item of food is presented in plastic or aluminium containers and the food is then covered in literally kilometres of plastic wrap. Potatoes, carrots and even onions are in plastic bags, mushrooms, tomatoes and fruit are in plastic trays shrouded in film. Are we all paying for these plastic doors, the food containers, the cling film? I would like to know how much the packaging contributes to the increased costs. We are offered no choice on whether to accept it or not. I would also like to know whether there are any health risks to us from all the plastic. Are we going to be able to recycle all this packaging? I weighed two washed and emptied trays: one plastic (27 grammes), the other aluminium (23 grammes). Our waste company accepts no aluminium trays for recycling, which presents an additional problem, as one aluminium school lunch tray arrives into our house every weekday. I share the outrage of Pricewatch's readers, but it's not just each individual family budget that's being affected. The cost to our climate is going to be heavy: the CO2 generated by manufacture of aluminium and plastic is only one part of it. Washing the items to make them fit for recycling takes energy (which we pay for). More CO2 is then needed to cart the stuff to a central recycling facility, where even more fossil fuel is needed to recycle it. As for the plastic doors, I reckon their lifespan would be 25 years at most, which gets us to 2050. I wonder whether there is any plan to dispose of or repurpose them. It doesn't appear that the supermarkets are taking climate change seriously. – Yours, etc, MARY SIKORA, Rosscarbery, Co Cork. Child poverty is not inevitable Sir, – The latest child poverty monitor from the Children's Rights Alliance is not just a wake-up call, it's a national shame. In one year, more than 45,000 more children in Ireland have been pushed into consistent poverty, bringing the total to nearly 103,000. This is not a statistic. It is a searing indictment of political choices, public apathy, and a system that continues to fail our most vulnerable: our children. Poverty is not inevitable. It's the result of policy decisions that too often favour economic metrics over human dignity. Today, children account for nearly 40 per cent of those in consistent poverty. Thousands go to bed hungry, live in insecure housing, and miss out on the most basic joys of childhood. This, in one of the wealthiest countries in the world. The Government has made welcome commitments, free school books, hot meals, GP access, but these measures, while helpful, are broad strokes. They do not touch the core of the crisis. The housing emergency is pushing nearly 4,800 children into homelessness, and 230,000 more live in material deprivation, families forced to choose between food and heat, rent and clothing. This is not just a policy gap. It is a moral failure. After nearly four decades working in developing countries, I've seen poverty in its harshest forms, from the famine zones of Africa to the slums of Calcutta. I still remember a six-year-old boy abandoned to die in a sewer. He survived, but only just. His story lives with me because poverty robs children of their worth and their future. While the context is different, children in Ireland are being let down in ways that should horrify us. This isn't just about numbers, it's about values. Do we value children only in rhetoric? Or are we willing to invest in their futures? We know what works: targeted child benefit, early intervention, proper housing, and dignified social protection. And yet two years after the ESRI called for a second-tier child benefit, we still wait. Meanwhile, on the world stage, child suffering deepens. In 2024 the UN verified more than 41,000 grave violations against children in conflict zones. More than 4,500 children were killed, many in Gaza, Congo, Ukraine, Ethiopia and beyond. Some 22,495 children endured multiple atrocities, recruited, raped, bombed, starved. It should haunt us. We must stop looking away. Whether in Dublin or Gaza, Galway or Ethiopia, every child matters. Let us be the generation that found its conscience, raised its voice, and acted. – Yours, etc, RONAN SCULLY, Knocknacarra, Galway. Roaming dogs on the beach Sir. – Having visited Seapoint yesterday evening for a swim, I could not believe the number of dogs still roaming freely among swimmers' belongings and in the sea, in spite of signs everywhere saying ' No Dogs'. Also, where we were changing there was a large abandoned dog poo for unaware swimmers to walk into... disgusting. There were many children there yesterday who do not like dogs and I don't think it is fair for them to have to endure this. Where are the dog wardens patrolling this area? They should be there constantly in the summer months. – Yours, etc, EILEEN BANNAN, Letterkenny, Co Donegal. Always wear sunscreen Sir, – As an Australian, now happily resident in Ireland, your cover photo of sunbathers ('Hotting up', June 20th) prompts me to share the hard-earned wisdom of my people: slip, slop, slap. More specifically, slip on a shirt, slop on sunscreen and slap on a hat. There are things to envy about the Australian way of life, skin cancer is not one of them. – Yours, etc, BEN AVELING, Ranelagh, Dublin. Nuclear weapons and disarmament Sir, – How can a country with nuclear weapons insist that another country should not have them? The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is signed up to by 191 countries, including five states that have nuclear arms. This treaty, as well as aiming to prevent the proliferation of nuclear arms, looks to the disarmament of those weapons already in existence. As far as I am aware no such disarmament has taken place since the putting in place of the treaty in the 1970s. Don't those with the power to disarm nuclear weapons not know of the utter devastation caused by the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or of the still evident effects of Chernobyl? No country should have nuclear weapons. The fact that some countries do have them causes others to develop these weapons. Can the double standard be stopped and a serious effort made to comply with the aims of the NPT to stop both proliferation and disarm already existing weapons? The consequences of not doing so are unthinkable. – Yours, etc, MARY FITZGERALD, Terenure, Dublin. EuroMillions dejection Sir, – Unlike Brian Cullen (Letters, June 20th) I had a longer period of excitement as I didn't check my tickets until I heard where the winning ticket was sold. My wish always, if it's not me (we have to live in hope!), is the winner is someone who needs it, remains in good health, takes the best of advice and puts their winnings to good use and gives to worthy causes. Again, unlike Brian, 'who just has to go and buy another ticket', I wonder is it some sort of post big jackpot Lotto dejection/ depression that I did not purchase a EuroMillions ticket in my local Centra this morning as the EuroMillions jackpot is ONLY ¤17 million tonight! – Yours, etc, JOE WALSH, Dublin.
Irish Examiner
an hour ago
- Irish Examiner
Mick Clifford: The USA is adopting a totalitarian attitude to free speech
Donald Trump's toxic orbit is now reaching directly into Ireland. Most recently, there were two specific areas in which this has come to pass. Last week, it emerged that officials in Coimisiún na Meán, the media regulator, could face potential restrictions on entry to the USA if the American administration deems that they are interfering with 'free speech' by regulating social media. This is an unprecedented move. Ordinarily, such visa restrictions might apply to corrupt officials in a dictatorship or rogue state. Now, in Trump's America, officials in a friendly European country could be banned from entry for simply doing their job. 'Free speech' is a movable feast for Trump and his followers. For instance, soon after assuming office in January, Trump declared that the Gulf of Mexico should heretofore be known as the Gulf of America. The PA news agency refused to do so, referring instead to its long-standing style book that determined it was still the Gulf of Mexico irrespective of what Trump might wish it to be. The king was not pleased. PA reporters were banned from the White House and from accompanying him on Air Force One. There have been similar instances where Trump and the gang he surrounds himself with have had issues with free speech. Elsewhere, Jess Casey reported this week in the Irish Examiner that new US visa screening protocols require international students travelling on a J1 visa to adjust privacy settings on all their social media profiles to public. The US state department announced it would now 'conduct a comprehensive and thorough vetting, including online presence, of all student and exchange visitor applicants' under the new guidance. This will allow immigration officials to check the social media of students in case there is anything incriminating on their devices. And what could be incriminating in Trump's America? Anything that is deemed to conform to the kind of broad policies that the current authoritarian administration is pursuing. So, if, for instance, a young student has something on their phone that might show support for Palestinians who are being massacred, that can be deemed contrary to US interests, and the student told to turn around and go home. Similarly, entry might be denied if the student is displaying anything that is supportive of the rights of minorities, such as the transgender community. As of now it is unclear if a student has, for instance, a screenshot or meme portraying Donald Trump as a buffoon whether this would be incriminating enough to warrant exclusion. One way or the other, the restrictions suggest that the USA is adopting a totalitarian attitude to any kind of speech that might be contrary to Trump's precious, and sometimes, venal, interests. So much for free speech. As with all totalitarian regimes, there is a different attitude to any kind of free speech that might fit neatly into the category of propaganda. Thus, Trump is a believer in social media companies having a free rein over what appears on their platforms. What could be incriminating in Trump's America? Anything that is deemed to conform to the kind of broad policies that the current authoritarian administration is pursuing. Picture: David Dermer/AP In the first instance, it suits him and his politics. He is an expert manipulator of the medium, where he is free to retail lies, distortions, and abuse at will. His current level of power in the USA implies he will brook no attempts to curtail that ability. So it was that Mark Zuckerberg's Facebook announced soon after Trump's inauguration that it was no longer deploying fact-checking on the site. So social media is destined in the USA to remain a fact-free environment. Beyond that, the 'free speech' that Trump believes in extends to far less protection of minors on social media. This leaves boys and girls exposed to material relating to sex and violence with practically no restrictions. The reasoning behind such a free-for-all is that any restrictions depress traffic on the sites, which in turn hits the profits for the social media companies. And right now, all the owners, the tech bros, are happy to play supplicant to Trump in order to ensure they remain in his favour. Now word is being conveyed across the Atlantic that regulators in Europe, and particularly Ireland where so many of these companies have offices, would be well-minded to follow the lead of the Americans or they will, in terms of visa restrictions, be treated like corrupt officials from a foreign rouge state. You could not make it up. This week, it was also reported that 25% of US companies that had previously supported Dublin Pride have now pulled out. The move is directly due to the hostility Trump has towards anything resembling diversity or inclusion. Whether or not that has anything to do with his own opinion is irrelevant. Politically, he views it as a seam to mine, and that's all that matters to him. So to be seen to be supporting minorities is, in the eyes of Trump and his acolytes, a sign of disloyalty to the king. Dublin Pride, and all the Pride festivities are important annual events. They celebrate the LGBT+ communities but also act as a reminder of how these, and other, minorities were treated at a darker time. Three years ago, however, the Pride festival showed a degree of intolerance that was not in keeping with the sentiment it espouses. Following a series of programmes on RTÉ Radio 1's Lifeline on the subject of gender dysphoria, Pride announced that it was dropping the broadcaster as a media partner. The programmes had been balanced, which required including voices from a small group opposed to the philosophical position adopted by most in the LGBT community towards gender dysphoria. Such diversity of opinion was unacceptable to the organisers of Dublin Pride, so RTÉ was dropped. Today, the level of intolerance increasingly displayed in the USA towards minority communities is of a far greater order, and is being accepted by elements of society out of nothing more than fear of reprisals from Trump and his acolytes. That such an atmosphere is now washing up on these shores through US companies running away in fear from Dublin Pride should be an issue of concern for everybody. We have problems in this country, mainly concerned with inequality, particularly in relation to housing. Those are nothing like the issues that have pertained in the USA for decades, and which led to an atmosphere where an individual like Trump could actually be elected to office, not once, but twice. Vigilance is required to ensure we don't succumb to the toxic waves from Trump's America that can wash up on these shores in various forms. Read More Donald Trump delays US TikTok ban again
Irish Examiner
an hour ago
- Irish Examiner
20 years of YouTube: 'We couldn't have predicted how the platform would evolve'
What toppled Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak, launched the careers of Justin Bieber and Ed Sheeran, and gave the world Gangnam Style and K-pop, sneezing pandas, and Mr Beast? Yes, YouTube. Happy 20th birthday to the video-streaming platform with three billion users in 100 countries, the world's second biggest search engine, and a billion hours of content a day. Crikey. Has it really been 20 years? Beloved of everyone from primary school kids to their grannies and everyone in between (in our house it's a verb), the existence of YouTube came about thanks to two very different events in 2004 — the Asian tsunami and Janet Jackson's nipple at the Super Bowl. Back then — for very different reasons – it was hard to find footage of these two events online. This gave three tech bros working at PayPal an idea for a video-sharing platform. Originally launched on Valentine's Day 2005 as a potential dating site — the three co-founders, Jawed Karim, Steve Chen, and Chad Hurley were self-declared geeks in need of dates — its initial slogan was 'tune in, hook up'. But the stampede of people uploading dating video profiles failed to materialise, so the three guys opened the platform to everyone — the first video, uploaded in April 2005, was a grainy 19-second clip of Karim at San Diego zoo in front of the elephants, titled 'Me At The Zoo'. Not long after, in October 2006, Google bought YouTube for $1.65bn — a year after Rupert Murdoch's NewsCorp had bought the now long-dead platform MySpace for $580m. 'We're the stage, you're the performers,' Hurley told the public. And behold, a new internet species was spawned — the YouTuber. Nobodies in their bedrooms became somebodies earning serious cash — remember Zoella? PewDiePie? Today's top three biggest YouTubers are Mr Beast (390m subscribers), T-Series (293m subscribers), and Cocomelon (193m subscribers). You might not know who these people are if you're Gen X and use YouTube for music, film, or how-to tutorials rather than following the YouTube-famous. Yet so many YouTube cultural moments are cross-generational — a YouTube 20th video in the form of a RickRoll has had a billion plus views to date (YouTube has its own constantly evolving language — the Rick in a RickRoll is Rick Astley). In Ireland, some YouTube classics include The man who fell on the ice, Singing priest, Irish man fights with sat nav, and The Spark. Silly, fun, heart-warming, shared and shared and shared. Alison Lomax, MD of YouTube in UK & Ireland: 'We've seen a lot of growth in the Irish YouTube community and economy and want to bring it together. If you're a YouTube creator and work on your own it can be quite lonely — having that peer group [of fellow creators] means people can learn from each other". Photograph Moya Nolan. A LIGHTBULB MOMENT Alison Lomax is CEO of YouTube for Ireland and the UK. After 11 years at Google — she's been working in tech and creativity since the days of dial-up — she moved to her current role at YouTube two years ago. Based in London, she regularly pops over to Dublin — on the day I speak with her, she's here for an event celebrating Irish YouTubers. 'What's fascinating about my job is that no two days are the same,' she says. 'It's incredibly broad and varied, there's always a lot to think about — everything that's happening in the UK and Ireland is happening in my inbox. 'We've seen a lot of growth in the Irish YouTube community and economy and want to bring it together. If you're a YouTube creator and work on your own it can be quite lonely — having that peer group [of fellow creators] means people can learn from each other. "When the first video was uploaded in 2005, there was no such thing as a creator, let alone a creator economy. People have gone from vlogging in their bedrooms to building studios and having meaningful careers off the back of their YouTube business. 'Another big difference we've seen is, as well as all the genres involved, is the breadth of partners involved — now we work with news publishers, sports partners, broadcasters like RTÉ, businesses keen to partner with YouTube to reach younger audiences and also reach a more global platform.' This involvement of traditional media outlets began in 2005 when US broadcaster NBC had a lightbulb moment. Early YouTube uploaded an NBC-owned Saturday Night Live clip, Lazy Sunday, and NBC sued — before realising that an SNL clip going viral on YouTube was actually a good thing. A very good thing. 'That change in decision making was quite a pivotal moment in YouTube's history. What we see now with big partners globally is their understanding of the role YouTube plays, how it can complement what they're trying to achieve. We are a redistribution platform,' says Lomax. Creators — the people uploading self-created content — and YouTube split the revenue from the uploaded content 55%/45%. 'Over the past three years, we have paid out $70bn to creators, partners, and musical artists. YouTube is a unique revenue-sharing model that no other platforms have at this scale. It's what has allowed creators to build their businesses on YouTube. It's revenue that they get week in week out.' Being famous on YouTube can open all kinds of doors. The Sidemen, a group of eight friends who post comedy, vlogging, and gaming content, are popular with teenagers — they're worth around $50m. 'The Sidemen launched 10 years ago, and are now probably the UK's biggest creators,' says Lomax. 'They have a vodka brand, chicken shops. They had a charity football match at Wembley recently and it sold out faster than any other football match, they raised £6m. They're celebrities. 'Anyone with a phone and an idea or a passion can build a business, which means the representation is from all over, from rural as well as urban areas, all over the world,' she says. 'Global distribution means that for a local creator, the majority of their content is watched outside of their country, so they can reach a global audience. 'Allie Sherlock is a great example, from the days of busking in Grafton St, she now has a huge YouTube channel [6.28m followers] and is well known in the US. I think YouTube is super-interesting when it comes to music, you have big artists who have launched their careers on YouTube, and genres like K-Pop. It's really positive.' Well, mostly. But like every other corner of the internet, there's toxicity, particularly in the so-called manosphere. Alison Lomax, MD of YouTube in UK & Ireland: 'Our view is that generative AI is going to power human creativity, not replace it. But with AI, there are obviously areas where the platform has needed to evolve, and areas where we've needed to look at our policies to see how they've needed to change." Photograph Moya Nolan. THE DARK SIDE OF THE TUBE Recent research from Dublin City University showed how the recommender algorithms on YouTube and TikTok fed 10 sock-puppet male-identifying accounts on blank smartphones 'masculinist, anti-feminist, and other extremist content irrespective of whether they sought out general or male supremacist-related content, and that they all received this content within the first 23 minutes of the experiment'. Yikes. So what does YouTube do about harmful content — misogyny, white supremacy, far right extremism? Why is the algorithm allowed to push toxic content with the potential to reinforce and influence harmful behaviours? To spread misinformation, to amplify the deranged toxicity of fringe groups and individuals? To proliferate far right content? Is it because, as outlined in Facebook whistleblower Sarah Wynn Williams' book Careless People, spreading hate and far right extremism is extremely profitable? 'It's a societal challenge,' says Lomax. 'We have guidelines and policies about hate speech, and policies which prohibit content that has hatred towards any individuals or groups based on certain attributes, and we enforce this really rigorously. We have a 20,000-strong trust and safety team, and we work around the clock to make sure that any content which violates our policies is removed from the platform.' Andrew Tate, the online face of toxic masculinity, was permanently banned from YouTube in 2022 (unlike on Elon Musk's X, where he currently has 10.7m followers). 'We terminated his channels for multiple violations. He cannot own or upload onto any YouTube channel, or reupload any content,' says Lomax. 'He has no channels.' She explains how the platform deals with removing harmful content, which is done retroactively, that is, it has to be up there in order to be taken down. 'We have AI, which everyone thinks is new, but has been part of our platform for a long time. That's the first step.' Content flagged by AI is reviewed by the trust and safety team which is made up of 20,000 humans. 'We publish quarterly reports where we share the percentage of content which violates our views — the last one was 0.1%. It will never be zero, but we want it to be as close to zero as possible. We have removed over 236,000 videos which violated our hate speech policies.' YouTube Kids, launched in 2015, is aimed at tweens too young to have access to the platform (you have to be 13 or older), with parental controls around content, watch time, and search history. 'We also work with independent child development specialists and we have an independent youth and family advisory committee made up of independent experts who consult with us on our safety and age appropriateness from a content and platform perspective,' she says. 'We are always looking at ways we can protect children at all different stages. It's critical for us. Online safety is the most important thing for the platform.' SHORT SHORTS YouTube is famous for mutating to survive. When, for example, TikTok came along, YouTube responded in 2020 with YouTube Shorts, offering YouTube users a TikTok-like experience. And while AI has played a long-term role in scraping harmful content from its millions of uploads, how is generative AI impacting the platform? 'Our view is that generative AI is going to power human creativity, not replace it. But with AI, there are obviously areas where the platform has needed to evolve, and areas where we've needed to look at our policies to see how they've needed to change. "Last year, we launched creative disclosure labelling, which means there's a label required if someone has altered the content. It's now required that this is disclosed, and in some cases a watermark is shown on the content itself. So this means creators are transparent about which content is AI and which isn't.' Another innovation is content ID — if you own content, and someone else uploads it in a user-generated content way, you can claim it and monetise it. 'It's protected under your copyright. Which is a good source of monetisation for creators and partners. It's a way of expanding systems we've built over the years to protect creators, because ultimately our business is only successful if it works for creators. It's an ecosystem based on trust. We want users to know what is real and what has been created by AI. And deepfakes are subject to our community guidelines the same as any other content.' As tech and our human responses to it continue to develop at warp speed, it's impossible to predict what YouTube, and the digital ecosystem in which it exists, will look like in the future. Or does Lomax have a crystal ball? She laughs. 'Looking back over the past 20 years, we couldn't have predicted all of the different changes and how much the platform has evolved. 'We're constantly responding to user behaviour changes and also to changes within the media landscape as well. We've made so many big pivots over the years that it's really difficult to predict the next 20 years.' She'd like to see more acknowledgement for the role of YouTube creator as a legitimate career path. 'How do we and businesses and the government support this creator economy and recognise its growth potential within the creative industries? It's a real incubation for talent. We want YouTube to be the most rewarding platform, creatively and financially.' Cork busker Allie Sherlock has been one of Ireland's great YouTube success stories. Pic: Marc O'Sullivan IRELAND'S MOST-FOLLOWED YOUTUBERS 1. jacksepticeye - 30.9M The Athlone-based gaming YouTuber started his channel in February 2012, achieving a milestone one million subscribers just two years later in August 2014. More than a decade on, he is Ireland's most-followed creator. He's also got his own coffee brand, Top of the Mornin' coffee. 2. Nogla - 7.41M After 12 years on YouTube, the Limerick YouTuber has cemented his place as our second most-followed content creator. 3. Allie Sherlock - 6.29M The 20-year-old Cork native regularly draws crowds busking on Dublin's Grafton Street, but her astounding success on YouTube has given her a global reach. She went viral smashing covers, but now she's releasing her own original music. 4. Inventor 101 - 5.89M This DIY channel says its based in Ireland, but its creator has kept their identity a secret. They upload "inventions and science experiments" every week. 5. Kauczuk - 5.24M The Meath-based 27-year-old has gained a following sharing videos of himself creating stunning pieces of art.
