In recent years, YouTube has become the world's largest video-sharing platform and a major source of income for millions of content creators. However, when a platform reaches such global scale and influence, even small changes to its algorithms or policies can have a huge impact on its user community. And recently, YouTube faced a wave of criticism when it admitted to automatically adjusting the quality of videos on Shorts without the consent of uploaders.

The issue first came to light when some users noticed that their Shorts videos were looking strange: the image was unusually smooth, the details were blurry, the colors were changed, as if an automatic beauty filter had been applied. At first, many thought it was just a technical issue or a problem with the filming equipment. However, as more creators spoke up, it became clear that YouTube was actually conducting a deliberate “experiment” in which it applied its image processing algorithm directly to users’ videos without any prior notice.

1. YouTube uses algorithms to “beautify” videos

YouTube has admitted to using traditional machine learning algorithms to automatically tweak creators’ videos, specifically Shorts, according to a report from Android Authority. This includes sharpening, denoising, clarity, and smoothing, with the official goal of improving the viewer experience.

At first glance, this seems like a positive step, especially since Shorts is competing directly with TikTok and Instagram Reels. On these platforms, image quality and visual experience are key to attracting and retaining audiences. A clear, colorful video can keep viewers on longer and coming back again and again.

The problem, however, is how it’s done: YouTube does it unilaterally, without asking creators for permission or providing any on/off options. This means creators lose all control over their work. Not everyone wants their videos to look “smooth,” and in many cases, this “beautification” can be counterproductive.

As a result, many videos, after being processed by the algorithm, become far from the original, even distorting the author's artistic intention. Some videos are distorted with strange colors, artificial lines, looking more like deepfakes or digital paintings than real footage. Rhett Shull (a famous YouTuber in the music and technology community) said his videos were changed beyond recognition: "It's no longer the video I made. I feel like my content is distorted in a confusing way."

Rhett’s reaction is representative of a common concern among the content creation community: that platforms are being too hands-on and not transparent. For the average viewer, the difference may not be noticeable. But for creators who spend hours, even weeks, grading and processing each frame, it’s a serious insult to their work and artistic identity.

2. When the "soul" of the work is distorted

For many creators, videos are not just money-making content, but also a work of art where they express their own style, personality, and message. Therefore, YouTube's arbitrarily editing without the author's consent is considered an act of infringement of creative rights and intellectual property rights.

One of the most famous examples is TheMrBravoShow, a YouTuber known for his retro style of filming with a 1980s camcorder. His videos are characterized by grain, blur, and vintage colors. However, after YouTube applied the “beautification” algorithm, all of these features were removed.

“YouTube’s experiment stole the soul of the video,” he said in frustration. “My artistic intentions were completely ruined by weird post-production effects that I didn’t ask for.” His case is not unique, with many creators in the fields of visual arts, documentary filmmaking, and independent video production facing similar problems.

This leads to the core question: Should a platform have the right to alter a creative work without the author’s consent? In other creative industries, copyright is strictly protected. If a newspaper were to arbitrarily edit a reporter’s article to the point of distorting the original meaning, it would inevitably face backlash and even lawsuits. So why can the same thing be done with YouTube videos without legal hurdles?

In response to the criticism, YouTube’s official representative Rene Ritchie explained that this was just a limited test and emphasized that the platform “does not use generative AI” but only applies “traditional machine learning” . He compared it to the way smartphones process photos to sharpen or reduce noise.

However, this explanation did not calm the wave of anger. Many people believe that the distinction between “AI” and “machine learning” is just a play on words to soften the severity. The problem is not about technology, but about creative freedom and respect for authors.

As the global debate over AI, copyright, and control of digital content heats up, YouTube’s actions have left many creators feeling disillusioned. They fear that today’s “beautification” could mean the platform could go even deeper: change the color tone, change the lighting, or even add effects without asking creators’ permission.

The long-term consequences could lead to legal disputes and a rift between the platform and the creators who directly contribute to YouTube's success.

3. YouTube's Hypocrisy

What makes the community even more angry is the contradiction in YouTube's policies. While arbitrarily applying algorithms to change other people's videos, YouTube plans to limit the ability of channels using generative AI to make money.

This is seen as hypocritical: why is it considered “improvement” when YouTube uses algorithms to edit videos, but it is restricted when creators actively use AI to enrich their content? Many creators feel unfairly treated, and this policy only adds to the suspicion that YouTube prioritizes the interests of the platform over the interests of the community.

A crisis of trust is brewing. Many creators worry that this is just the beginning. They ask: How far can YouTube go in the future? Will the platform automatically change the color, sound, or even edit video content for the “benefit of viewers”? Without transparency and control for users, this could have serious consequences for creative rights.

4. The crisis of trust and the call for transparency

The incident has sparked a wave of calls for YouTube to change. Creators want more than just an explanation; they want a choice. They want the platform to provide an option to turn any automated processing on or off, rather than imposing it arbitrarily.

Furthermore, the community is also demanding that YouTube be more transparent about its use of algorithms and AI. In an era where digital content plays a vital role, intellectual property rights and control over work are vital. If YouTube continues to ignore user opinions, it risks losing the trust and support of the community.

Many have suggested that competition from other platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and decentralized platforms could be a wake-up call for YouTube. If it doesn’t listen to and respect its community, it could lose the very content that keeps it alive.

5. Conclusion

YouTube’s decision to arbitrarily intervene in Shorts videos is not just a technical or policy issue, but a wake-up call about the overwhelming power of technology platforms. When companies like YouTube have the ability to decide how billions of people view and create content, they have a responsibility to be transparent and respect the rights of their communities.

Improving video quality is welcome, but any change needs to be based on consensus and transparency. Only when creators have choice and control over their content can trust be maintained.

YouTube has been, is, and will continue to be the leader in online video. But if it doesn’t listen to feedback and adjust its policies, YouTube will create its own biggest enemy: dissatisfaction and departures from the very people who make theplatform thrive.