Federal Officials and YouTube Nearing a Deal

GovTechGuy writes "The federal government is on the verge of reaching an agreement with YouTube that would allow agencies to make official use of the popular video-sharing service. A coalition of federal agencies led by the General Service Administration's Office of Citizen Services has been negotiating with Google, YouTube's parent company, since summer 2008 on new terms that would allow agencies to establish their own channels on the site. Agencies have not been [allowed] to post videos to YouTube (although many already have) because under the current terms of service, people who post content are subject to their state's libel laws. Federal agencies must adhere to federal law. On Tuesday, government officials said the negotiations were 'very close' to being completed."

In bed with Google

[basementman]

Why does the federal government need an official video channel anyway? They should post their public domain videos on their own site and allow others to distribute them to youtube, liveleak, hulu etc. Giving youtube favoritism just adds to Google's ever growing monopoly, even if they generally act ethically. The idea of having a incredibly powerful company like google, essentially get humped by the federal government worries me.

Re:In bed with Google

[British]

I think I might know why: They(99% of the time) can handle the bandwidth. Any link aggregator site like fark, or even here posts a video, the website can't handle it after an hour. YouTube always rises to the video sharing occasion. YouTube now becomes a really big TV channel with lots of programs.

Propaganda Time

[Anonymous Coward]

The Government plans on saturating the internet with propaganda, nothing more, nothing less.

Re:In bed with Google

[Anonymous Coward]

From TFA:

"She said the government is negotiating with other popular video-sharing and social media sites, including Vimeo, Blip.TV, Facebook, MySpace, Twitter and LinkedIn."

Re:In bed with Google

[rts008]

Why does the federal government need an official video channel anyway?

How else do you suggest they set up and start the 'Ministry of Truth'?

Just keep your eye on how comments and replies are handled on that channel...

Re:Comments/Ratings policy, propaganda

[Anonymous Coward]

First Amendment, anyone?

Nope. You're proposing a false dichotomy. US citizens are free (at least, still free) to criticize the government's videos elsewhere. However, I do agree with your comment's point, just not the argument it uses as support.

Re:Oh joy

[Scrameustache]

Wait, you mean it will be like C-Span, but whenever i want?

I don't know if youtube has the bandwidth.

Like C-Span, but with people linking directly to the good bits.

Re:Be ready for Microsoft's complaint

[Plutonite]

By that logic, any company that wins a government contract (e.g Lockheed Martin) can be sued by another potential contractor (e.g Northrup Grumman). Clearly the government can enrich any private corporation in exchange for services and products, based on its needs, yes? One would be more worried about the government enriching failed CEO's with multi-million dollar goodbye packages out of honest taxpayer money, but that's another story.

I hope Google says no, or at least manages this wisely. If the government invades the "promoted content" section with propaganda, especially to US-based IPs, it will not be a good thing.