YouTube is out [maybe not]

After attending a Coordinating Council meeting last week, my stake president informed me that all the stakes represented received direction that YouTube servers were not to be used for streaming stake conferences or other church meetings.

Even though the privacy of the video can be controlled, the biggest issue is the church no longer has control whether the conference will be saved on the YouTube servers following the conclusion of the conference, particularly when a visiting authority was to speak. This is an option that only the originator (usually the STS) has control over.

I understand their wisdom and will comply. I can't confirm this is a church-wide policy, but it appears to be leaning in that direction. I have 5 or so months until our next conference, so I'll try to let you know where this leads. It may be as simple as using the same setup that I outlined HERE, only pointing Wirecast to the church's servers instead of YouTube.

Good to know. It makes sense from the Church's perspective. Was this just for stakes in the Davis County area? It'll be interesting to see if/when anyone else hears this.

Mikerowaved wrote:the biggest issue is the church no longer has control whether the conference will be saved on the YouTube servers following the conclusion of the conference, particularly when a visiting authority was to speak. This is an option that only the originator (usually the STS) has control over.

That same concern would seem to extend to any non-church service that offers the ability to record the broadcast. So, it would appear to affect more than just YouTube.

russellhltn wrote:That same concern would seem to extend to any non-church service that offers the ability to record the broadcast. So, it would appear to affect more than just YouTube.

Probably, but YouTube was specifically mentioned. I sometimes wonder if my success stories with YouTube posted here were escalated to the attention of those in the capacity to make these kinds of decisions. It doesn't really matter; just curious.

What's kind of funny is if an STS really wanted to record a stake conference, it would be easy enough for him to do. In other words, the ultimate control of recording or not is still in the hands of the STS, no matter what webcasting service they use, including the church's. Of course obedience is the key, but that would hold true for any webcasting method.

Just for the record, I have zero problem following the council received.

Just for the record, I have zero problem following the council received.

Sigh... at least it was good for a little while.

Very well, I tried to make Stake Conference in a remote building as palatable as possible. I am also guessing we're precluded from using other CDNs as well, ya? Our stake just split, perhaps we can just stuff everyone into the Stake Center.

Hagothsen wrote:I am also guessing we're precluded from using other CDNs as well, ya?

Based on what was said above, I'd avoid any that have the ability to record the stream.

I'm sure the argument will be that there's no way to guarantee that they won't record it, even if they say they don't.

Hagothsen wrote:I'm sure the argument will be that there's no way to guarantee that they won't record it, even if they say they don't.

You're probably right, although even using the church's system, recording is trivial, so it really all comes down to obedience.

Keep in mind that recording it on YouTube's servers makes it one button click away from mass distribution. Something that's different from making a recording off of the chapel system.

I thought I read somewhere that the church's solution uses Microsoft Azure. How can we be 100% sure that they're not keeping recordings? While we're at it, how can we be sure anything streaming over the internet, isn't being recorded? Here in Vegas, our ISP has changed to Cox in many areas. Now, we can't keep Cox WiFi (unfiltered, raw internet) out of our buildings. The FM Group says they've got them to turn it off, but it isn't. I'm not saying the church IT departments aren't capable of negotiating provisions for non-recording with their chosen CDN. Certainly, every CDN is capable of recording. How do you verify that it isn't happening?

Hagothsen wrote:How do you verify that it isn't happening?

We really can't. That's between the church and their chosen CDN.

Hagothsen wrote:I thought I read somewhere that the church's solution uses Microsoft Azure. How can we be 100% sure that they're not keeping recordings? While we're at it, how can we be sure anything streaming over the internet, isn't being recorded? Here in Vegas, our ISP has changed to Cox in many areas. Now, we can't keep Cox WiFi (unfiltered, raw internet) out of our buildings. The FM Group says they've got them to turn it off, but it isn't. I'm not saying the church IT departments aren't capable of negotiating provisions for non-recording with their chosen CDN. Certainly, every CDN is capable of recording. How do you verify that it isn't happening?

It's not our role to verify, it's our job to utilize the resources the Church has asked us to utilize in the way they have asked us to use them. One thing that we all must keep in mind is that no matter what kind of setup we have 4 cameras, 3 sound feeds, text overlay , etc... the next guy in the calling may not have all the same skills. This is a MAJOR reason we should follow budget guidelines as well.

The setup at each encoding site is simple and easy to get started.. rely on it, it serves us very well.

If we all decide what to do on our own how does the church track usage, its important to know how many stakes are and area not webcasting, it's important for all sorts of future planning and wise use of $$. We are a house of order.

John, we're getting a bit off topic, but just like with the older Webcast Communicator box there was also an optional software solution; the church has selected Wirecast as the optional software solution for the VidiU box. From the church's Wirecast Overview page, it reads:

Wirecast software by Telestream is an optional method for creating an encoded webcast audio or audiovisual stream. Some units choose to use Wirecast because it has advanced features, such as the ability to switch between multiple cameras, display words to hymns, add speaker titles, and show media during a webcast.

It goes on to say that if the above features are not important to you, then they recommend using the VidiU box. I use the features listed above and found they are greatly appreciated by the receiving site(s).

I was using the YouTube servers mainly because of all the early problems STS's reported using the church's portal. I understand the church was working out bugs, licensing issues, and other glitches, meanwhile my webcasts were sailing along trouble free. I was also not restricted by the church's 2.1 Mb/s upload BW cap. It's a simple task to configure Wirecast to use the church's portal, but the quality will have to be reduced quite a bit from what I normally use to get under their BW cap.

Why are Stake Conferences so secretive? General Conference, Music and the Spoken Word, the Mormon Channel, BYU Speaches, and the rest of the Christian World are all happy to share their views on YouTube. Is it simply because too many widow's mites have been spent to allow one bit of availability go unused? I recently spoke with someone in the ICS department, and he honestly felt that because they got so relatively few complaints, all was well. So then, why is it that Sake Conference needs be more private than say, the Priesthood Session of General Conference?

I'm not saying I know better than our leaders. I know recording Stake Conference is not allowed, even forbidden. So I humbly ask, why? (We're allowed to do that now.)

Stake Conferences are not for a General Audience as General Conferences are. It's a simple matter of how inspiration works and is directed to be used. Counsel given, even by a General Authority, in a Stake Conference applies only to those living within that stake and NOT for the general membership.

Webcasts for Stake Conferences are used to reduce facilities costs plain and simple. Invest in a streaming solution rather than investing in Larger and Larger meetinghouses or renting out local larger halls for gatherings. It's the Lord's servants being wise with their stewardship over His money (our tithing dollars).

johnshaw wrote:Stake Conferences are not for a General Audience as General Conferences are. It's a simple matter of how inspiration works and is directed to be used. Counsel given, even by a General Authority, in a Stake Conference applies only to those living within that stake and NOT for the general membership.

I would think you could say the same thing about counsel given at coordinating council meetings. Other than stake and ward realignments, I've never heard anything at Stake Conference that wouldn't be good for all to hear. Unless we sin city saints are the only ones that need to stop doing this or should be doing more of that.

I'll just leave it up to my Stake President. I'll report and let him decide.

Hagothsen wrote:I've never heard anything at Stake Conference that wouldn't be good for all to hear.

True, but I have heard many things at stake conferences that you will never hear at general conference. Many general authorities have told me that what they say at stake conference, while guided by the Spirit, is also guided by the reverence and spirit the members of the stake bring to the meetings.

Hagothsen wrote:I would think you could say the same thing about counsel given at coordinating council meetings.

Not sure what that means... those aren't published / webcast either.

Other than stake and ward realignments, I've never heard anything at Stake Conference that wouldn't be good for all to hear. Unless we sin city saints are the only ones that need to stop doing this or should be doing more of that.

Except that isn't how the Priesthood works, neither is it how inspiration and/or revelation works - regardless of what we 'think'.

I'll just leave it up to my Stake President. I'll report and let him decide.

This is correct as long as he understands that the decision is either follow the direction of leaders or not follow the direction of leaders.

johnshaw wrote:Not sure what that means... those aren't published / webcast either.

You say that inspiration used to bless saints at any given Stake Conference, is local to those saints, and not to the church as a whole. Could we not say the same thing about inspiration given at a single coordinating council meeting?

Hagothsen wrote:You say that inspiration used to bless saints at any given Stake Conference, is local to those saints, and not to the church as a whole. Could we not say the same thing about inspiration given at a single coordinating council meeting?

I'm still not sure what you're talking about, of course it's the case. In that case there is Stewardship assigned to the Area Authority who leads the Coordinating Council through Priesthood direction.

Hagothsen wrote:So then, why is it that Sake Conference needs be more private than say, the Priesthood Session of General Conference?

I'm not saying I know better than our leaders. I know recording Stake Conference is not allowed, even forbidden. So I humbly ask, why? (We're allowed to do that now.)

Speaking for myself, I can think of two reasons:
Handbook 2: 2.1.1 on Priesthood keys: "The President of the Church delegates priesthood keys to other priesthood leaders so they can preside in their areas of responsibility. .... This presiding authority is valid only for the designated responsibilities and within the geographic jurisdiction of each leader’s calling." So while there may be much said that would be good to hear, any inspiration is valid and binding only on that stake and not the general membership of the church. The keys to speaking to the world rests with the First Presidency and the Twelve.

Secondly, the church takes doctrinal purity quite seriously. Talks for General Conference are prepared and shared ahead of time - if nothing else to help the translators and Closed Captioning to be prepared. I suspect they're also vetted for any false doctrine. Most of the speakers are from the Twelve, Seventy, Presiding Bishopric, or heads of Auxiliaries. On the other hand, Stake conferences frequently have members of the stake speaking on an assigned topic, but no one has reviewed their talk ahead of time.

But ultimately, it's a question of obedience. We've been given the principles and asked to follow them.

johnshaw wrote:

Hagothsen wrote:You say that inspiration used to bless saints at any given Stake Conference, is local to those saints, and not to the church as a whole. Could we not say the same thing about inspiration given at a single coordinating council meeting?

I'm still not sure what you're talking about, of course it's the case. In that case there is Stewardship assigned to the Area Authority who leads the Coordinating Council through Priesthood direction.

Let me try again.

Inspiration given at any Stake Conference is meant for, and should only be made available to, members of that stake.
Meanwhile, inspiration given at any Coordinating Council Meeting is applicable to and appropriately applied throughout the entire church?

Hagothsen wrote:Meanwhile, inspiration given at any Coordinating Council Meeting is applicable to and appropriately applied throughout the entire church?

I'm not sure which meetings you're talking about, but the Coordinating Council Meetings I can find are somewhere between Stake and Area in scope. They would not be worldwide. Only CHQ is worldwide.

Despite calling the GSC, and making an honest attempt through CHQ, where I was initially connected to Stake Conference Scheduling, then passed to a manager in ICS, I've found no prohibition against, and no counsel to stop using YouTube, other than from the original post in this thread. The most strident answer I got, was a politically charged "It's not approved." I distinctly got the feeling of "If you use it, we can't help you." The general consensus appears to be, that because an Area Authority directed Stake President's in Davis County to stop using YouTube, we all should follow, regardless of location. There have also been great points about recording, and Priesthood Authority. At this point, it's way over my spiritual pay-grade.

I've got my appointment set-up with my Stake President to present all of the opinions expressed in this thread. Ultimately, unless I hear it directly through my chain of Priesthood Authority, I won't necessarily believe it applies to me. Nevertheless, I would be less than honest if I didn't present all sides of this discussion to my Stake President, and trust in his judgment, not mine. I suspect he'll ask our Area Authority, If they tell me to not use YouTube, I won't. FWIW, I'll extend the same directive to all CDNs, Our stake is down to two buildings now. I may just use a Slingbox, we've got the bandwidth to make it work.

Hagothsen wrote:...I've found no prohibition against, and no counsel to stop using YouTube, other than from the original post in this thread.

Thanks for bringing us back on topic. I was the OP and although I posted this:

Mikerowaved wrote:I can't confirm this is a church-wide policy, but it appears to be leaning in that direction.

I probably didn't make it clear enough that, so far, this direction came from my SP following a Coordinating Council Meeting, where the Area Authority made this point very clear. If your SP hasn't received that direction (yet), then I don't see a problem using it.

YouTube has a vast array of servers worldwide that are constantly being updated. (My son works for Google and spent several years working on the YouTube side of things.) I also webcast other non-LDS live events using YouTube and have never experienced a single glitch that wasn't my fault. And did I mention they are free to use?

I don't want to knock the servers the church leases for their webcasting portal. I'm sure they're perfectly capable. I just think that the program was rolled out a bit prematurely. A stake conference is not a great venue for discovering bugs. We're seeing less reports of webcasting problems in the forum, so maybe I can start putting more trust in the church portal. I can either use that, or I'll setup a VPN to the other building and unicast the stream directly to the receiving PC.

I for one wish they'd let us keep a short-term copy. The reason is this: When I'm producing a broadcast, I'm focused on the tech of the broadcast not necessarily the message, checking overflow rooms, monitoring the internet connection and broadcast, chatting with the remote site(s) to verify things on their end, etc... . Maybe it's a little bit "Martha" of me, but I want to make sure that the rest of the stake is able to receive the message and feel the spirit with minimal distractions. When the conference is over, I would like to be able to be spiritually fed as well and review the messages given. But, this is one of the tech issues where the direction is very clear.

As for YouTube, I've used a variety of alternative streaming solutions in tandem with the church's system for the last several years. The reason for this is that I've found the quality of the church's solution to be hit or miss, with about a 50% success rate. I might be in sort of a unique position, as I've been in this calling for coming up on 10 years, and for the majority of that period I've supported broadcasting at multiple stakes (for about 3 years, I was doing 6 stake conferences a year in addition to a few regional meetings, the last 3 years I've supported 2 stakes who currently share a building), so even though we weren't among the first to do webcasting, I've gotten a lot of experience in a relatively short period of time. The last stake conference, both stakes had it the same day. The first stake had a bunch of random drops throughout testing the day before, and in the pre-broadcast leading up to conference start, so we decided to go to the alternate stream. The second conference, the connection seemed more solid for some reason, so we stayed with the church's system, and had no issues. There are a lot of factors that could contribute to why the first broadcast had issues and the second one didn't, but it's always made me nervous to rely on a single streaming solution. I'm a big proponent of eliminating single points of failure whenever possible. I can't have redundant internet connections (as much as I'd love to), so I'm stuck with that one, and I can't have redundant sound systems in the building, but in as many places as it is feasible I try to have redundant systems and/or backup systems. I haven't heard anything regarding YouTube from our Area Authority (I just spoke with him last week), so for now I'll keep it in my stable of possible alternative streaming solutions.

I ask the presiding authority before each SC if I can record the meeting for my own use. To be fair, I inform them that this is prohibited. I promise to view it one time and then delete it. I haven't had a denial yet. If a visiting GA says no, then so be it.

Well, new information has come to light (not sure when), but while setting up for webcasting my stake conference, I ran across this on the Meetinghouse Technology / Webcast page. Down near the bottom is a section titled "Best Practices" and the very first link was for a PDF on "Alternate broadcast solutions". Really? Well, here's the jist of the text:

Webcast: How to Broadcast When Troubleshooting Hasn’t Worked

The Church’s current webcast solution is always improving and thousands of broadcasts are successful
each year. However, issues can still arise.

If you have recently tested the Church’s meetinghouse webcast solution and all troubleshooting
efforts have been unsuccessful, you may choose to use an alternative live-stream product for your
broadcast event. Although there are hundreds of live-stream products in the marketplace that may
meet your specific needs, many have found success using YouTube Live as their alternate product.

They must have been eavesdropping on the forum!

It goes on to say that for support, you're on your own, but that goes with the territory.

Splendid!!!! Thanks for posting this.

If be interested to know what failures people have that would send them to YouTube. Because not having 1080p isn't a reason, neither are any of the excuses I've seen on this forum. Whatever people want to do I guess.

Mikerowaved wrote:"Alternate broadcast solutions". Really?

Webcast: How to Broadcast When Troubleshooting Hasn’t Worked
. . . Although there are hundreds of live-stream products in the marketplace that may
meet your specific needs, many have found success using YouTube Live as their alternate product.

What they didn't say is that to use YouTube, you have to break so many rules. Unless your stake conference is the week before or after general conference during the free-for-all period, you can't get there from here unless you bypass the firewall.

I only did it with the approval of the presiding authority: typically but not always, my Stake President.

johnshaw wrote:If be interested to know what failures people have that would send them to YouTube. Because not having 1080p isn't a reason, neither are any of the excuses I've seen on this forum. Whatever people want to do I guess.

I only stream and distribute (throughout the building) in 720P, sometimes 1080i. The key benefit to using YouTube Live is unparalleled overhead. I’m not saying the church should try to match YouTube. I wouldn’t think it prudent to even try. For General Conference, I show the 720P (our projector is only 1280x800) YouTube feed. It ran nearly ten straight hours on Saturday, and six on Sunday with ZERO dropouts. There were over 90K people watching the YouTube stream when President Nelson announced the new temples. No one can compete with YouTube for internet broadcast reliability.

It’s that very reliability or the lack thereof, the pushed us early YouTube adopters away from the official CDN. I’ve had officer sustained votes have to be redone because the church CDN crashed during a three Stake realignment. We’ve had to use a cellphone perched on a stool under the overhead speaker in the library because the church CDN crashed. There were too many dropped frames to count, even on the ‘new’ system. I figure if a family is going to gather their children, in their Sunday Best, to travel to a darkened building, and watch the proceedings on a screen for two hours ... good enough isn’t good enough, especially if we can do better.

As long as my Stake President authorizes it, I’ll use YouTube.

In full disclosure, we recently split our stake again, and we all cram ourselves into the Stake Center. I haven’t had to broadcast in more than a year. If/When the time comes again, it will be little more than a mouse click, and the sharing of a URL to do it again. And, we’ll share the URL with senior missionaries, shut-ins, people traveling to Disneyland and Grandma in Utah. Then, as soon as we say ‘Amen’, I’ll delete the video.

I'm working on getting setup for my first stake conference streaming broadcast and I can't seem to find any clear information about what the firewall blocks or dosen't block and when. In my testing, youtube seems to be allowed... But is that just around general conference? This document seems to indicate that you can use youtube as an alternative? https://www.lds.org/help/support/bc/cle ... f?lang=eng

Does it have to be unblocked on a case by case basis?

Fwiw: There have been several good recommendations here in the forums that Sunday Streams is good at that sort of thing. I used them myself to stream a funeral to the missionary son outside the US, and I found their skill, systems, and customer service to be excellent. Here is a search for the phrase "Sunday Streams": search.php?keywords=%22Sunday+Streams%22

mitchrichie wrote:In my testing, youtube seems to be allowed... But is that just around general conference?

That's been true in the past. I don't know if that's changed.

rmrichesjr wrote:Fwiw: There have been several good recommendations here in the forums that Sunday Streams is good at that sort of thing. I used them myself to stream a funeral to the missionary son outside the US, and I found their skill, systems, and customer service to be excellent. Here is a search for the phrase "Sunday Streams": search.php?keywords=%22Sunday+Streams%22

I'm guessing Sunday Streams is not blocked by the firewall then?

mitchrichie wrote:I'm guessing Sunday Streams is not blocked by the firewall then?

The sending unit did not appear to have any difficulty connecting, so I'm pretty sure that was okay. For the receiving side, I ran a Raspberry Pi to view the round-trip, and that worked fine, too. Firewall rules can change over time, but it seemed okay a few months ago.

rmrichesjr wrote:

mitchrichie wrote:I'm guessing Sunday Streams is not blocked by the firewall then?

The sending unit did not appear to have any difficulty connecting, so I'm pretty sure that was okay. For the receiving side, I ran a Raspberry Pi to view the round-trip, and that worked fine, too. Firewall rules can change over time, but it seemed okay a few months ago.

It's pretty stressful to just hope a random firewall change doesn't cripple a webcast, especially when we have a member of the 12 visiting. I suppose if we have firewall issues he can make a quick call to HQ and get it resolved?

Our stake has had terrible luck with the church azure cloud based system. Not really sure what to do at this point.

mitchrichie wrote:Our stake has had terrible luck with the church azure cloud based system. Not really sure what to do at this point.

Sometimes glitches are unavoidable, but often times they are. 3 weeks before our stake conference (held this past weekend) I received a very nice email from the Production Planner for the Broadcast & Events Division at Church Headquarters. Because we were having a visiting authority, she asked if we were webcasting and could possibly use some assistance in getting it setup. If so, she would put me in touch with their "transmission engineer", who has much experience in assisting other stakes with their webcasting, besides working on large broadcasts like General Conference, the CES Worldwide Devotionals for Young Adults and Regional Stake Conference Broadcasts. If anyone can help you shake out your webcasting issues, I'm sure this brother can. Watch for the email and take advantage of his help. If it still fails to work for you, then you might want to consider an outside streaming service.

Mikerowaved wrote:3 weeks before our stake conference (held this past weekend) I received a very nice email from the Production Planner for the Broadcast & Events Division at Church Headquarters.

Yes, it appears they're being proactive in helping the STS to have a successful broadcast. I've also gotten one and we are not having any visitors.

I notice that this issue recurs about every year. To reiterate several previous posts, we are using Sunday Streams and have been doing so for the last 3 years. In that time we've enjoyed 1080P webcasts with no outages or even stutters. The one anomaly we thought was due to Sunday Streams was actually a camera that was double framing during a pan (since fixed).

We made this move to get rid of the laptop at the receive end and use Roku boxes instead (AppleTV and Rpi work also). We found that the laptop was implicated in over half of all our problems. Since this move, webcasts have become trivial for us with literally 20 minute setup of cameras and 5 minutes at remote locations.

Sunday Streams allows payment for the month of use, so it's an annual cost of $100. Well worth the stability we've found. In addition, they are password protected, do not maintain a recording, do not require reservations (just a monthly bandwidth limit which we've never come close to), and have excellent customer support.

I look forward to having a similar system supported by the Church webcast group, whom I've talked with several times. I really hope we get there some day.

Do they have a Roku app? How does it work on the receiving end?

russellhltn wrote:

mitchrichie wrote:In my testing, youtube seems to be allowed... But is that just around general conference?

That's been true in the past. I don't know if that's changed.

I've been checking on YouTube each week since the last general conference and it hasn't gone back to being blocked, at least on the "Managed" filter level (least restrictive). Don't know about the other filter levels or if this is permanent, but it looks encouraging for those seeking a backup to the church's portal system.

I finally got an official answer during a phone call with HQ. YouTube will remain unblocked however the church firewall enforced YouTube’s safe-search protocol which gives unreliable results for live-streams. The system can’t detect the content of a live stream so sometimes it will just block it completely.

mitchrichie wrote:I finally got an official answer during a phone call with HQ. YouTube will remain unblocked however the church firewall enforced YouTube’s safe-search protocol which gives unreliable results for live-streams. The system can’t detect the content of a live stream so sometimes it will just block it completely.

That's unfortunate. We haven't experienced that ourselves, and we generally get to it through the dashboard rather than looking for live streams, so maybe that's why.