YouTube is the standard for video for many government organizations. Fast, free, and easy to embed. But that choice comes at a price. In fact, recent research shows that this price may be in violation of the law.
The reality: municipalities sharing data with Google on a large scale
In March 2026, the scale of the problem came to light. Research into Dutch municipal websites found that over 60% share data with Google as soon as the page loads — often without the user’s knowledge or consent.t weakers.net This involves personal data, such as IP addresses. And that is not simply allowed under the GDPR. The reason? In many cases, these are YouTube videos embedded on the site. These embeds transmit tracking data, even if the visitor does not play the video at all.
In other words: even before someone clicks “accept” in a cookie banner, the data has already been shared. That is not only undesirable, it is simply not allowed.
YouTube is not neutral
This problem does not stand alone. It touches upon a more fundamental point: YouTube is not a neutral platform. YouTube was designed with one goal: maximum engagement. The longer someone watches, the better. It is built on data collection, tracking, profiling, and commercial interests. That clashes with the role of the government. Municipal websites are not marketing channels. They are digital service desks where citizens can go for essential matters such as passports, permits, and healthcare. And unlike commercial websites, users have no choice. That is precisely why the bar is set higher.
Privacy: not a choice, but a responsibility
When a website loads external services such as YouTube, data is automatically forwarded to external servers. Examples include IP addresses, device data, and browsing behaviour. Together, this data forms a digital fingerprint of the user. Under the GDPR, this is only permitted if explicit consent has been given in advance. This is precisely where things go wrong. In more than half of the cases examined, this data sharing occurred without valid consent, often entirely out of the user’s sight. For organizations that must safeguard the trust of citizens, that is a fundamental problem.
Accessibility: not an afterthought, but a prerequisite
Furthermore, YouTube was not created with digital accessibility as a starting point. Yes, there are options for subtitling, but important features such as audio description or a full-text alternative are missing or difficult to integrate. And that is problematic. Because for governments, accessibility is not a ‘nice to have’, but an obligation.
In the Netherlands, government organizations are required to make their digital communication accessible in accordance with the WCAG guidelines. This explicitly applies to video as well.
Consider:
- subtitles for the deaf and hard of hearing
- audio description for the blind and visually impaired
- a transcript as a full text alternative
Many common video platforms do not support these features (fully). Or only with a workaround, such as with from Scribit.Pro widget.
It can (and must) be done differently
At Scribit.Pro, we see this issue recurring daily within government organizations. The need is clear: to use video, but in a way that is privacy-proof and accessible.
That is why we partner with Blue Billywig: a European video platform that is designed with privacy by design and offers extensive capabilities for accessible video.
Combined with our expertise in digital accessibility, we ensure that video not only works but also complies with legislation and is inclusive for everyone.
Curious what that looks like for your organization?