I saw it coming. In fact it was inevitable since YouTube/Google holds all the cards in how the business gets run and not the self made YouTubers. Business is fickle and markets change. It was never going to last. And with the terrible conduct many Youtubers have and lack of actual rules (and lack of enforcing of rules) it was a matter of time until pushing the envelope reached its peak and caused a huge storm like this one.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Kotaku: YouTubers Say They Can't Make Money Covering Call of Duty: WWII
- Thread starter LordOfLore
- Start date
I saw it coming. In fact it was inevitable since YouTube/Google holds all the cards in how the business gets run and not the self made YouTubers. Business is fickle and markets change. It was never going to last. And with the terrible conduct many Youtubers have and lack of actual rules (and lack of enforcing of rules) it was a matter of time until pushing the envelope reached its peak and caused a huge storm like this one.
ClosingADoor
Member
This "pussy shit" is there so advertisers don't pull out completely. Some control is necessary, because otherwise your Coca-Cola and Nike is not going to be advertising on your platform at all and instead pick one of the million other channels they can use to reach their audience.
What precedent does this set exactly?
This. For Call of Duty, the box has a M for Mature on it. So the content is Mature and some brands will not want to put their ads next to that.
mr teaspoon
Member
One is an independent venture that really only relies on the internet to continue existing, the other depends on YouTube never changing.
Don't compare, say, Dan Carlin to Angry Joe.
dead souls
Member
Exactly. It's setting no precedent at all. Advertisers have always been able to choose what content to associate their ads with and I see no reason why Youtube should be any different.
ClosingADoor
Member
Stupid thing is, if Angry Joe was a bit smart, he'd branch off and go host his own content and website by now and set up direct contracts with advertisers. I really don't get why these large Youtube channels don't do this more. Is the Youtube audience just not moving with them then?
Deadpool_X
Banned
This is why my buddy's wife left her 45k subs on YouTube and moved her stuff over to Twitch. She couldn't make money on YouTube anymore, but she's doing better than ever on Twitch and even has a patreon account.
I never understood what it was about streamers/Youtubers that has people, even on GAF, SO pissed off about them having jobs where they play video games for a living that they're happy when they lose said jobs.
Like, be a good person, you're not being a good person. And if you think you are, why?
Like, be a good person, you're not being a good person. And if you think you are, why?
He used to have some of that when he was part of That Guy with the Glasses network and even did collabs and stuff. Everyone from that network had to move to YouTube when so many places bellied up. Though I am surprised Angry Joe doesn't have a Patreon like all of his friends have. Plenty of reviewers have Patreons.
Demoskinos
Member
This. Youtubers will just upload their videos to youtube without monetization and use Patreon to form and sustain their communities. YouTube will just cripple its business in the long run this way.
You bring up a good issue with the pushback to the YT Heroes program (not that I fully remember the details). The YT community as it is essentially wants everything to always stay the same as it was a few years back, and it's gotten to a point where it seems that many believe that the status quo is their "right." So, really, any compromise YT or advertisers might offer will be met with hundreds of angry voices both quiet and loud. It's really a two-way street and the constant unproductive animosity towards Youtube is tiring.
Angry Joe is smart, well smarter than a lot of other Youtubers.
He does YouTube, sponsored videos, Twitch, sells merchandise and also he does have his own website.
He has diversified his income and his content.
ClosingADoor
Member
I think it is mostly about the sense of entitlement these Youtubers seem the bring across. They complain and complain and complain about Youtube, its policies, the ads, but never seem to put any effort in branching out, starting their own website or doing something else.
This makes it seems like they just want to make money the easiest way possible like they deserve to have money thrown that way, and it is no surprise people are a bit put off by that attitude. Even if it is not meant that way, that is how it comes across.
Lord of Castamere
Member
From what I can, no, the audience doesn't move. I've seen a few conglomerates try to move and fail. For example, Normal Boots, had 5+million subs combined, they started with timed exclusivity on the 6-7 channels involved, and now the sites more or less dead, with a couple of the smallest channels uploading videos still, but the top channels haven't uploaded in half a year or longer.
ClosingADoor
Member
I see. If he moves across piece by piece and gets control that way, I think that would be a good thing for him and other people on Youtube. Use Youtube as a way to get an audience and then have them go with you to other channels where you have control over your content.
But if that ends up like this, maybe it is useless in the end. Wonder if this has to do with constantly needing new subscribers to keep up the number of viewers because people drop off after a while. And on your own website it's harder to do that.
It's this misplaced feel of entitlement I don't get.
They believe fair use means they can use anything and make money with anything, no matter who created that product in the first place.
They believe advertisers don't have the right to pull their ads, their own ads, because that would hurt their income or their favourite YouTuber's income.
They believe a company such as Nintendo shouldn't be allowed to use the system to their advantage and that they offer Nintendo a valuable advertising with their let's plays so they should get all of the generated revenue.
This all might make sense if one grew up on YouTube and never got in touch with media management. But it's unrealistic. That's not how the world works.
The YouTube of today is a mess. Because of Google and because of its users.
DJ Incompetent
Member
Yelling at walls! Huzzah!
Ad companies themselves are making extremely conservative selections, generally ignoring most of human culture in favor of content cleaner than FCC regulations (or your country's television or radio standards). Because everybody's silly, stupid outrage culture:
If people are going to be generally mad, you should be mad at advertisers who do not understand the risk of cultural nuance and intentionally select an extremely conservative ad filter set (as people discover patterns of what companies set what filters). Or advertisers can learn in a few months that only targeting YouTube Kids viewers leads to no short term conversion rates.That's fun too. Let's screencap McDonalds ads next to Baby Alive doll pooping vids. Thaaaat'll show 'em..
This article means YouTube, in response to the ad boycott, created new filters to further customize what advertisers want to be featured on.
Ad companies themselves are making extremely conservative selections, generally ignoring most of human culture in favor of content cleaner than FCC regulations (or your country's television or radio standards). Because everybody's silly, stupid outrage culture:
But the marketing nightmare claim is unrealistic. All three screenshots in the initial trigger WSJ article did not lead to brand boycott. Nobody is drinking coca-cola less because racial slurs were in a video title with an ad.
There already is age-gate. But if you let a subject type in, you let it all in. Professionally offended people would not give an inch to these circumstances either, just like blaming videogames on shootings and tragedies. People will willfully ignore age-ratings when they want to share an outrage-headline.
If people are going to be generally mad, you should be mad at advertisers who do not understand the risk of cultural nuance and intentionally select an extremely conservative ad filter set (as people discover patterns of what companies set what filters). Or advertisers can learn in a few months that only targeting YouTube Kids viewers leads to no short term conversion rates.That's fun too. Let's screencap McDonalds ads next to Baby Alive doll pooping vids. Thaaaat'll show 'em..
jetsetnickradio
Member
I'm a small time YouTuber that mostly makes Destiny videos and I saw my revenue go from around $1.20 in March to just $0.03 in April... lol
Obviously this doesn't effect my livelihood at all, but it's still discouraging to see and I can definitely understand why full-time YouTubers are freaking out right now.
Obviously this doesn't effect my livelihood at all, but it's still discouraging to see and I can definitely understand why full-time YouTubers are freaking out right now.
lowhighkang_LHK
Member
This is mostly true. Because I do think youtube can do a better job of content I.D and making sure ads are being properly placed.
I do think there are instances in which a youtuber puts up a video that let's say McDonald's would be fine with. But because in that very same video he mentioned his Dad is an ex-army vet all of sudden his video gets demonetized because McDonald's ad contract with youtube likely has a "no war" clause associated with it. But on the flip side, the only way youtube can be a viable entity for google is if they run it as cheaply as possible. And in order to do so it needs a lot of software/program automation. Which as we know, is going to create problems like this.
Pretty much this. I have nothing against people doing Youtube for a living, but once videos stop being a free hobby and start being a profession, you lose your freedom to do whatever you want. Do you like shouting "Fuck" repeatedly? Go for it, but don't whine when McDonalds and Gilette pull their sponsorship. Do you like pulling off ultra-violent death moves in DOOM? If your sponsors don't want their ads immediately following it, that's their business.
The thing that gets me is that these people got into the entertainment business intentionally without understanding or respecting that the sponsor is king, and are now acting shocked that factors other than view count are relevant to their profitability. If I went into work shouting fuck, it'd have a serious effect on my income. A little professionalism on Youtube would be nice if these people want to be professionals and not hobbyists.
Agreed.
What? What does Activision has to do with anyth... ah, you only read the thread title.
blazinglazers
Member
This is all that needs to be said.
You're free to make whatever content you want, but you're not entitled to AD$ by virtue of hitting the Upload button.
I'm happy to see the bottom fall out of a system that's produced 99% low effort click bait garbage. YouTube content is a dumpster fire. The less pranksters, commentators, reactors, roasters, fake news fabricators and child abusers are incentivized, the better.
The tiny percent of YouTubers making actual, original, well-produced content will be fine, because their talents will be financially valuable outside of YouTube's ever-shifting platform.
crisdecuba
Member
Has there been a general drop in revenue for folks who still have their videos monetized?
jetsetnickradio
Member
Definitely. That's one of the things that's really irritating creators. All of our videos still say "Monetized" but there's clearly no ads playing on them and YouTube isn't providing an explanation as to why.
From what I've been able to gather, it's a combination of there being far less ads to go around (because of the boycott) and also advertisers are using new tools that filter out videos and channels associated with incredibly vague keywords.
The traffic volume on YouTube is probably orders of magnitude larger than all free porn sites put together.
The ads on those porn sites also generate far more revenue per user than Youtube's for various reasons.
Your proposed solution just feels like suggesting a Mom and Pop shop should transmogrify itself into a Walmart. Youtube is a monolith. It isn't going anywhere, and a lot of the people who watch these youtubers are casual fans at best just looking for the latest gameplay. The Best Friends have their own website with their own videos, for example, but no one goes there. Youtube, also, isn't profitable. It is extremely expensive to host the amount of videos and deal with the amount of copyright strikes, users, and companies, that Youtube has to deal with. Other places have tried and will continue to try to replace Youtube, but ultimately, the closest anyone has come to that is Twitch.
Adam_Vania
Banned
"creators" "creators" "creators". i get it, editing a video is hard work, but they didn't make these games. they aren't creators. the people that made the games are creators. they are commentators. they are reviewers.
Stone Ocean
Member
I'm not talking about them being entitled to adsense or anything, I'm talking about this whole "haha people losing their livehood, who fucking cares" attitude that some posters around here have.
Youtube money was never gonna last forever but at least show some empathy.
My opinion exactly.
jetsetnickradio
Member
"Creators" is a title. If you upload to YouTube, you are considered a "creator" and that's how you're addressed. It's basically a job title. That's why people use that term so much. I think you're reading too much into it.
ClosingADoor
Member
Your fill rate just went down. That is pretty normal in programmatic ads like this. Advertiser set stricter filters, less ad space is bought. Youtube probably doesn't like it any better themselves because they are simply selling less ads.
Youtube isn't going anywhere, but if you make your income from a channel there, you know that they have all the power to change the rules and you should prepare for that by looking for other revenue streams. If your mom and pop store has 1 client in their town, that is not sustainable business also.
I know Youtube isn't profitable. Or at least not very much so. That is why they will always put advertisers over channels, because they need to make money, and at the moment there is more supply of content then demand of advertising space it seems. For Youtube, any channel is replaceable and that is what a lot of Youtubers are seeing now. They don't get to set the rules and just have to take it. If they don't like that, they need to take control themselves over their platform and income.
YouTube has become the defacto place to watch videos. The new television of flipping through channels, so no one is going to leave it. All anyone can do is play by the new rules as business shifts. Audiences don't shift like magic.
But YouTube stopped being about the "You" part ages ago as well. Hence why they're looking to get into TV now and become closer with those networks. Some will be the very same networks that have shut down many channels and given strikes to reviewers and the creators on the site.
To put it absolutely bluntly. YouTube can survive without YouTubers, but YouTubers will not be able to survive without YouTube.
But YouTube stopped being about the "You" part ages ago as well. Hence why they're looking to get into TV now and become closer with those networks. Some will be the very same networks that have shut down many channels and given strikes to reviewers and the creators on the site.
To put it absolutely bluntly. YouTube can survive without YouTubers, but YouTubers will not be able to survive without YouTube.
Professor Beef
Banned
Basically this. I always figured Youtube was too big to fail, but I never really saw this coming.
Should talented people like SuperBunnyHop or Mark Brown who just "edit a video" get get fucked by this? Are they not doing original stuff?
Should these CoD channels who just talking about the news and updates about the new game over gameplay get fucked by this?
I watch the Super Best Friends play games because they make me laugh really hard. I literally don't care what they play, I just watch them to be entertained. This goes for many other channels.
These popular "creators" are entertainers, reporters, analysts, comedians, teachers, and so much more. And the service they use to share the stuff they've made is trying to fuck them over.
Im_So_Pringles
Member
Define "real job."
It looks like YouTube is headed the way Ebay has went. The small and medium guys are just gonna be pushed out by the system. The old media will take over YouTube like old retail took over Ebay. Everything I see sold on Ebay now is sold by a big retailer. Regular people used to be able to make good money selling on Ebay. Now I laugh at scalpers making $10 to $20 in profit on Switches after adding 60 to 100 dollars to the price. The system now as a seller is basically if you aren't making them thousands in fees they don't care if buyers scam you all day.
archreaper93
Member
Yeah, Maximilian got hit by this as well. A bunch of his videos got demonetized (Boss Rage, Assist Me, etc).
It's a bunch of bullshit.
It's a bunch of bullshit.
Why is this a YouTube problem?
YouTube provides a free video hosting service. Not a guarantee of revenue.
Advertisers have always flocked to low-risk/high-return mediums.
Video creators use YouTube because selling ads requires work (or paying other people to do it for you).
Your complaint is like saying streamers are shitheels because they attracted ad dollars from traditional media. No, the ad dollars left for a more attractive product.
Teran
Member
I don't think people should find this surprising. The corporate world sterilises and pigeonholes everyone to the point where the content they can make just doesn't match up with what they want.
We were living in a honeymoon period where the corporate end hadn't really caught up with YT and the nature of largely unrestricted content creation, but that's over now. I mean, the best old school analogies are network TV and HBO, or network vs satellite radio. Shit, I remember when I monetised my Wordpress blog, I got a nice list of things I could no longer discuss to keep things advertiser friendly. If you want your medium to run on corporate advertising, it has to be sanitised to the point where it loses a lot of its creative freedom.
This is why I dislike people's negative sentiments towards content creators using Patreon and other such means to fund their work. Direct private sponsorship is the only way a creator can be themselves and guarantee profiting from it, rather than be told to go fuck themselves by advertisers because they decided to mention something mildly controversial.
We were living in a honeymoon period where the corporate end hadn't really caught up with YT and the nature of largely unrestricted content creation, but that's over now. I mean, the best old school analogies are network TV and HBO, or network vs satellite radio. Shit, I remember when I monetised my Wordpress blog, I got a nice list of things I could no longer discuss to keep things advertiser friendly. If you want your medium to run on corporate advertising, it has to be sanitised to the point where it loses a lot of its creative freedom.
This is why I dislike people's negative sentiments towards content creators using Patreon and other such means to fund their work. Direct private sponsorship is the only way a creator can be themselves and guarantee profiting from it, rather than be told to go fuck themselves by advertisers because they decided to mention something mildly controversial.
Max gets thousands of viewers everytime he streams on Twitch and can sometimes get 500 dollars or more in donations alongside new subs.
Hes set for life. Yeah its bullshit because he works hard on his content like Boss Rage but he has nothing to worry about.
LoveCake
Member
I don't think that the big advertising companies have liked YouTube or online advertising at all, the big media companies have definitely never liked YouTube, I for one watch more content provided by You Tubers than regular TV and this is what they are worried about.
The real problem that will cause for YouTube is that it will just kill off the next generation of content providers because they simply won't be able to get off the ground and make it something part time or even full time and without content YouTube is nothing.
This was inevitable though that the bottom would fall out and the revenues would drop as advertises fell out for some reason or another, also the big media companies have been waiting for something to bash Google (YouTube) with for a very long time and have been blowing this up out of proportion it could be argued.
I am surprised that advertised content enabling free use has lasted so long, I don't think it really works either, does it really give value to the company advertising its product, how many people does it actually affect, the it keeps the brand in peoples mind, if Coca~Cola and Pepsi stopped spending a billion dollars each would people stop drinking it, no of course not, and with all the ad-blockers and the amount of people that complain about adverts and openly say that they block adverts, If anything that is more then enough to put advertisers off, I don't ad-block myself the sites that I use all the time like GAF for example, but free content that is advert supported is unsustainable I think, there are options like direct support like Patreon but that is only going to work if you already have a large user-base, somebody just starting out isn't going to have a chance and without the finances they would be able to provide the constant content that is required to build up a big enough user-base to enable Patreon.
I am not sure that there is an answer that will please everyone involved.
The real problem that will cause for YouTube is that it will just kill off the next generation of content providers because they simply won't be able to get off the ground and make it something part time or even full time and without content YouTube is nothing.
This was inevitable though that the bottom would fall out and the revenues would drop as advertises fell out for some reason or another, also the big media companies have been waiting for something to bash Google (YouTube) with for a very long time and have been blowing this up out of proportion it could be argued.
I am surprised that advertised content enabling free use has lasted so long, I don't think it really works either, does it really give value to the company advertising its product, how many people does it actually affect, the it keeps the brand in peoples mind, if Coca~Cola and Pepsi stopped spending a billion dollars each would people stop drinking it, no of course not, and with all the ad-blockers and the amount of people that complain about adverts and openly say that they block adverts, If anything that is more then enough to put advertisers off, I don't ad-block myself the sites that I use all the time like GAF for example, but free content that is advert supported is unsustainable I think, there are options like direct support like Patreon but that is only going to work if you already have a large user-base, somebody just starting out isn't going to have a chance and without the finances they would be able to provide the constant content that is required to build up a big enough user-base to enable Patreon.
I am not sure that there is an answer that will please everyone involved.
ScientificPizza
Banned
A lot of the blame for this has to go back to youtube for being so abhorrently shitty with their content control
This is literally a case of a few bad apples
Though something like this was always going to happen to the people who make 100% of their living from youtube. Same goes for those on Twitch (though that's a much more regulated platform)
This is literally a case of a few bad apples
Though something like this was always going to happen to the people who make 100% of their living from youtube. Same goes for those on Twitch (though that's a much more regulated platform)
PleaseDontBanMe
Banned
whatever happened to creating videos for the sake of art?
yeah, painters, poets, filmmakers, photographers musicians, writers can be paid well, yet some don't and that doesn't stop them from doing it because its an art form that they love and appreciate.
I sorta don't feel sorry for these babies complaining about not getting paid when other forms of artist often don't neither
You're not making money uploading youtube videos discussing another companies IP?
Neither did Vincent Van Gogh and he created his own original works of art and wasnt a professional critic or watcher (reacter) of things
Cry me a river
If not being able to get paid to create a youtube video stops you from creating youtube videos then phuck yule.
yeah, painters, poets, filmmakers, photographers musicians, writers can be paid well, yet some don't and that doesn't stop them from doing it because its an art form that they love and appreciate.
I sorta don't feel sorry for these babies complaining about not getting paid when other forms of artist often don't neither
You're not making money uploading youtube videos discussing another companies IP?
Neither did Vincent Van Gogh and he created his own original works of art and wasnt a professional critic or watcher (reacter) of things
Cry me a river
If not being able to get paid to create a youtube video stops you from creating youtube videos then phuck yule.
It's not just "my definition." It's the common definition used in sports, music, acting, the performing arts, photography, and any number of other fields to separate amateurs from professionals. It's also used by the IRS who draws a hard line between running a business with legitimate deductible expenses and a hobby where it's all discretionary spending.
If someone is having a hard time in their profession characterize that by having insufficient income or irregular income. People lose their jobs and still have a profession where they can pursue another job.
If you can't talk anyone into paying you in the first place, or if it has been a long time since you were making money at what you're doing, then it's a hobby.
See above. If nobody values what you're doing enough to pay you semi-regularly then it's not a profession. If you're not considering whether anyone wants the translation enough to pay for it, it's probably just a hobby.
Both point of views are not wrong. But YouTube has failed miserably to regulate their platform. As have other social media outlets that MPs have outright criticized and called shameful for allowing hate, terrorism and overall extremism to become a profitable venue.
This is the original article of how the ad boycott originally started:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/google-faces-questions-over-videos-on-youtube-3km257v8d
New events happened 4 days ago with the MPs again calling Google/YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and others out.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...witter-google-youtube-terrorist-a7711051.html
Speaking of child abuse, DaddyoFive's stuff was never dealt with, even after they made national news. Though they now have lost custody of their kids because it reached national news. YouTube largely did nothing.
This blanket approach youtube is taking to monetization on videos is just going to lead to a sanitization of profitable content on youtube. I understand some of the people cheering at this affecting the more unsavory channels on the platform, but this is something that effects everybody, not just the people you don't like. So either people are going to need to look for alternative sources of income, change the way they produce their content (or the content itself) or cut down the amount they can produce or just stop making content altogether. I can't see how this benefits myself as a viewer or content creators.
I do agree that these people should have a fallback though, though my tone is not so much an "I told you so" as I feel I'm detecting from a lot of posts. Of course all the people celebrating this out of jealousy can go back to their miserable, salt-filled lives.
Youtube offers a wide-reaching platform to allow really unique content reach people, and I would hate to see that same platform snuff out that thing that makes is really special and distinctive from other ways of engaging content.
I do agree that these people should have a fallback though, though my tone is not so much an "I told you so" as I feel I'm detecting from a lot of posts. Of course all the people celebrating this out of jealousy can go back to their miserable, salt-filled lives.
Youtube offers a wide-reaching platform to allow really unique content reach people, and I would hate to see that same platform snuff out that thing that makes is really special and distinctive from other ways of engaging content.
Depictions of violence real or fictional.
It is far, far too broad when there's a spectrum to violence from light comical like in cartoons all the way to heavy and brutal like a slasher film.
Is this a different than literally anywhere else? If a guy on Sportscenter or working in an office just tossed out the N-word, I'm guessing that would be a wrap for them.